Hi there! You are currently browsing as a guest. Why not create an account? Then you get less ads, can thank creators, post feedback, keep a list of your favourites, and more!
I aim to misbehave
retired moderator
#76 Old 19th Apr 2010 at 6:54 PM
Quote: Originally posted by ivan17
While I was part of few debates, I have learned that most of the Americans:
1. Hate Christians (especialy Catholics).
2. Would love to throw atomic bomb on Vatican.
3. Would love to remove all Christians (especialy Catholics) from Earth.
4. Must always be right.

Correct me if something is not true, pls.


Well, as far as I'm concerned that's not true. Americans are very Christian, and the thing about the Vatican.. I agree with grumpy_otter, who on earth would destroy all that artwork??

Quote: Originally posted by ivan17
@Vampire_aninyosaloh

Well, Messiah will come in the end, one last time.


That is your Christians' opinion, but Jews may have theirs too.. How do you know that yours is the right one?

Check out my tutorials: For TS4: Eyelashes and for TS2: Eyes and Eyes 2
-My Insta-

Please, call me Nina (:
Advertisement
Lab Assistant
#77 Old 19th Apr 2010 at 9:31 PM
Okay, this will be fun!

@grumpy_otter

Nive answer.

@Nekowolf

Appreciated and expected, but very much appreciated.

@bakea

Quote: Originally posted by bakea
Are you sure you are not the messias??Because I think you want to convert everybody into your religion ...
Are you conscious that criticizing Americans who don't like catholicism saying things like they love throw atomic bomb on Vatican or that they always be right you are becoming like one of them?You hate this kind of people in the same way they """hate""" catholics. Do you know that there exist more opinions than yours?
Think about it.


If I am Messiah, I wouldn't be here. I would aided people.
I don't want to convert anybody. I am just defending my religion.
I gained the impression that they don't like Vatican and Catholicism, atomic bomb was just joke.
And, believe me or not, I like Americans because they are different than Europeans. They are open, interesting, kind, they are not conceited and they are not hypocritical. Love to chat with them.

Quote: Originally posted by Oaktree
Why does God tempt people? If he is perfect, he should be able to create perfection, in which case there is no need to tempt or test. Humans are theoretically his creations, so why is it that they were able to become "imperfect"? Further, all other life is supposedly his creation, yet there are species that die out naturally all the time, without any human intervention. Every expression of nature has flaws, so how is it that God is perfect?


Well, you must ask God for real answer. We were perfect while we were in Eden. But we have our opinion and we are greedy, cursed and prone to sin.
Animals are perfect. They are like in a dream, dreaming, programmed just for us. If we were animals, I think that we would kill all humans. Personaly, I think that we are too advanced. We are living like Sims with cheats. Before, everything was perfect - nature, but we are destroying everything with living with cheats. This is also God's test. Maybe He said:"Enough! I will not save them anymore.". Maybe we have betrayed Him. Maybe everything is predetermined, our life, whole time. The Apocalypse of John is my favorite part of Bible. God know what will be, but we have chance to change everything. If everyone (on Earth) at least thought to these words of mine our destiny would not be tragic.



Quote: Originally posted by Oaktree
1. No. Many of my friends are Christian, and one of my closest college friends is Catholic.
2. I shudder to think of all of the knowledge that would be lost if the books held by the Vatican were destroyed.
3. Again, no. Christians are still people, and most of them are moderate enough in their views that they can get along with others who don't share their beliefs. Even the extremists are deserving of life until they take someone else's.
4. Everyone tries to be right as much as they can be. Part of human nature is that we inherently search for truth. Ideally, one would remain open to other possibilities if there is logical reason for them. Unfortunately people (not just in America) have a tendency to close their minds off to other possibilities once they find something that they want to believe.


This is the best answer. Thanks very much!!!

Quote: Originally posted by fakepeeps7
Yes, I'm sure a bunch of stodgy old men in silly hats and robes are at the top of the nuke list.


Okay, but why is so much prejudice to them? Pope cried yesterday while he was talking with the victim of pedof...
He is in 80's, just to know.

Quote: Originally posted by Vampire_aninyosaloh
That is your Christians' opinion, but Jews may have theirs too.. How do you know that yours is the right one?


Well, He will come and they will know (they are expecting Him too). Can somebody know that his own opinion is fake? That's then not opinion.
Scholar
#78 Old 19th Apr 2010 at 10:04 PM Last edited by Nekowolf : 20th Apr 2010 at 12:11 PM.
I hate to get into it here, because of the topic, but I'll answer anyway, though let's try not to let it get off topic.

The prejudice, as you see it, is because we've already gone through this back in, I believe, the 90's. A wide-spread sex scandal involving Catholic priests molesting young boys, which was then covered up and allowed to continue for years. What's going on now is, aside from size (don't let that fool you, it was still pretty big), just like what happened when it occurred here in the U.S.

So then it happens again, we're not all that shocked, just really pissed off. Partly because not only was it covered up, but left to continue. Essentially, everything the Vatican could have done to screw it up, they managed to do.

EDIT: Also, illegal under our laws. This is where you get into the territory of inter-nationality, which is much more tricky. So we see him as doing something blatantly wrong, which I'm sure is just as illegal in much of Europe. Also, to compare, Bernie Madoff, who headed the largest ponzi scheme EVER, conning billions of dollars, was if I recall, emotional at his court hearings. But he still went to jail anyway. Frankly, you break the law, you break the law, no exceptions (or I would like to hope).

CORRECTION: It happened in the early 2000's

Is that a shillelagh in your pocket, or are you just sinning against God?
Scholar
#79 Old 20th Apr 2010 at 12:54 AM
Quote: Originally posted by ivan17
Well, you must ask God for real answer. We were perfect while we were in Eden. But we have our opinion and we are greedy, cursed and prone to sin.
Animals are perfect. They are like in a dream, dreaming, programmed just for us. If we were animals, I think that we would kill all humans. Personaly, I think that we are too advanced. We are living like Sims with cheats. Before, everything was perfect - nature, but we are destroying everything with living with cheats. This is also God's test. Maybe He said:"Enough! I will not save them anymore.". Maybe we have betrayed Him. Maybe everything is predetermined, our life, whole time. The Apocalypse of John is my favorite part of Bible. God know what will be, but we have chance to change everything. If everyone (on Earth) at least thought to these words of mine our destiny would not be tragic.


But how is it that we were capable of falling from perfection, if God created us and he is perfect? Further, animals are not perfect. There are animals that kill for fun (dolphins, for example), steal (most of them), rape, and many other things that would be considered morally wrong. So, if we are to hold animals to a moral standard, they are not perfect. If we are to hold them to a standard of survival and ability, again they are not perfect. There are plenty of species that have gone extinct without any interference from man. Most, if not all animals are just good enough to survive (maybe) but are nowhere near 'perfect'.

If everything is predetermined, that makes God even more of a sadist. Why would he choose for his creation to fall from grace? Why would he choose for all of the bad things in the world to happen? This is the problem that a lot of religious debate comes down to: God cannot be all-powerful and all-good because, if that were the case, the world would be perfect and there would be no evil.
Lab Assistant
#80 Old 20th Apr 2010 at 8:41 AM
@Nekowolf

Thanks for answer, I understand.

@Oaktree

Well, animals. Yes, they are killing and stealing, but they don't know that they are doing wrong. While we were in Eden, we were naked, but we didn't know that we are naked or doing something wrong.
We can only imagine what it would be, if all people would walk naked...it will be stupid, immoral and disgraceful.

Maybe is everything predetermined, but we have chance to change our destiny. God is powerful and perfect, but He has his own plans. After Apocalypse world will be perfect and we too. I believe that perfect world after Apocalypse is His final plan.
And when we say that God is everything good, that means that He will forgive our all sins.
In Old Testament God took first born Egyptians. God can be dangerous too.

"On that same night I will pass through Egypt and strike down every firstborn - both men and animals - and I will bring judgement on all the gods of Egypt. I am the LORD."

Exodus 12:12

"Gather the people together, men and women, and children, and thy stranger that is within thy gates, that they may hear, and that they may learn, and fear the LORD your God, and observe to do all the words of this law..."

Deuteronomy 31:12

But this doesn't mean: "OMG, God will kill us!", no. We should respect God.

Psalms 136:

"Give thanks to the LORD, for he is good! His faithful love endures forever. "
Lab Assistant
#81 Old 20th Apr 2010 at 4:27 PM
Quote: Originally posted by ivan17
If I am Messiah, I wouldn't be here. I would aided people.
I don't want to convert anybody. I am just defending my religion.
I gained the impression that they don't like Vatican and Catholicism, atomic bomb was just joke.
And, believe me or not, I like Americans because they are different than Europeans. They are open, interesting, kind, they are not conceited and they are not hypocritical. Love to chat with them.


I like you defend your religion, but not by the way yo do it ... to defend tour religion you really need to critize others?

I know atomic bomb was a joke, I'm not silly ... when people say that they don't like Vatican, they concern to the lot of money they have and to the little money to spend in poor people ... you think that it's OK? Because I personally think that if you are christian, you must believe that poor people has to be aided ...

And ... if you like Americans an you think they are fantastic ... why you criticize them that way? If you say that they have always to be right ... you can't say they are open ...

I respect all religions and I think everybody can believe in every God they want ... I respect christianism ... but I can't respect people who don't respect other religions only because they are not the same that his religion ...

**If I sit the same way as other people my reasoning ability is decreased by forty percent**
world renowned whogivesafuckologist
retired moderator
Original Poster
#82 Old 20th Apr 2010 at 4:29 PM
Christianity thread is thataway... *points*

This here is the other religions thread...

my simblr (sometimes nsfw)

“Dude, suckin’ at something is the first step to being sorta good at something.”
Panquecas, panquecas e mais panquecas.
Scholar
#83 Old 20th Apr 2010 at 6:54 PM
Oops. I didn't pay attention to which thread I was posting in. I'll put any future posts in the other thread.
Field Researcher
#84 Old 20th Apr 2010 at 6:52 PM
Quote: Originally posted by ivan17
While we were in Eden, we were naked, but we didn't know that we are naked or doing something wrong.
We can only imagine what it would be, if all people would walk naked...it will be stupid, immoral and disgraceful.


I'd be very curious to hear why you think that being naked is wrong, stupid, immoral, and disgraceful. The only situation where I would agree that it is stupid is if you remain naked while in a climate where that would mean dying from the cold.

There are still plenty of tribal people in this world who live naked or semi-naked, and there's nothing wrong with it, nor is it disgraceful or immoral, they don't go around and have sex with everyone around just because they are naked, heck I believe that it is in cultures where people cover up that people become actually lustfull about body parts.
Scholar
#85 Old 20th Apr 2010 at 7:38 PM
Some of the stuff that's been discussed is partly why I'm a pagan.

Monotheism is a broken philosophy, to me; at least the monotheistic concept of a "perfect" deity. One could argue "oh it's beyond our comprehension," but that's not really an answer. I don't think anything is "beyond our comprehension." Beyond what we understand, maybe, but that's not the same; that just means we have yet to learn the details of it. A monotheist deity must have some form of limitation.

So instead, I'm polytheistic. While I have my own concepts of what the gods and goddesses are, there is one big definition between them and the monotheistic "perfect" God. That they themselves are flawed. They are far more human than, say, the Christian God. They get into trouble, they make mistakes, they learn new things, they have their own personalities, etc. But also, in some mythologies, gods can die.

Another reason is, well, just take a look at what Ivan and Neerie are talking about; nudity. Natural things, like that, or sex, drinking, anger, etc. These things are not seen as sinful, things not to be ashamed of. Rather, they too are attributed to the gods and goddesses via their personalities. Sure, some aspects were frowned upon or even outright disliked. But nothing like to the levels you see in the Church. But also, those are olden times; most of what is practiced nowadays (that is, regarding neopaganism specifically) is, I think, either Reconstructionist or eclectic, so there tends to be more modern aspects as well, so therefore likely higher acceptance of what used to be disliked.

Is that a shillelagh in your pocket, or are you just sinning against God?
Undead Molten Llama
#86 Old 20th Apr 2010 at 8:23 PM
Since the Christian thread is currently kind of boring...I'll bug Neko!

Quote: Originally posted by Nekowolf
Monotheism is a broken philosophy, to me; at least the monotheistic concept of a "perfect" deity. One could argue "oh it's beyond our comprehension," but that's not really an answer. I don't think anything is "beyond our comprehension." Beyond what we understand, maybe, but that's not the same; that just means we have yet to learn the details of it. A monotheist deity must have some form of limitation.


And I have to say that this is what ultimately turned me off of paganism, when I dabbled. Why offer worship/reverence/what-have-you to flawed beings that were/are just like us? For much the same reason, I don't understand ancestor worship. Many of my ancestors were really screwed-up people. Worthy of worship/reverence? Uh...no.

True, one could say that the Christian God is simply an idealized perfect, person, and many people do say that and I'm sure that some people see especially Jesus that way...but I don't think so. Of course, my conception of God is not 100% the standard Christian conception of him, often veering toward an odd sort of pantheism, God being in everything, woven into the fabric of the universe. But still...not human. Not flawed. And He may or may not have limits, depending on where my thinking is on the subject. I'm still learning about Him, after all, and what I discover/is revealed to me is not always standardly Christian.

Quote:
Another reason is, well, just take a look at what Ivan and Neerie are talking about; nudity. Natural things, like that, or sex, drinking, anger, etc. These things are not seen as sinful, things not to be ashamed of. Rather, they too are attributed to the gods and goddesses via their personalities. Sure, some aspects were frowned upon or even outright disliked. But nothing like to the levels you see in the Church.


This is, unfortunately, the direction that the church has taken, yes. I think they take the earlier chapters of Genesis far too literally in general; I have come to believe it that it is allegory with a far deeper meaning than the words on the page. The deeper meaning is often missed. Adam and Eve's nudity was a symbol of their innocence, prior to their eyes being opened to worldly knowledge. Having to wear clothing after the Fall is symbolic of lost innocence. It doesn't mean that nudity is either bad or good in and of itself. But this is one of the many prices of Biblical literalism, of not reading between the words and seeing the deeper (and, IMO, far more beautiful) meaning.

I'm mostly found on (and mostly upload to) Tumblr these days because, alas, there are only 24 hours in a day.
Muh Simblr! | An index of my downloads on Tumblr.
Lab Assistant
#87 Old 20th Apr 2010 at 9:01 PM
@bakea

I am trying to defend my religion and also not to hurt other participants ot this and other debates. And I am so sorry if I hurt someone, it wasn't my intention.
Well, I don't know how much money Vatican owns and where it goes. It will be great to use it in noble purposes.
This 4 theses were part of my plan to incite to action and more members to participate. I don't have anything against other religions and nations, peoples.

@Neerie

Would anyone felt comfortable walking through the streets of New York naked, for example?

Personaly, it will be wrong, stupid, immoral, and disgraceful to walk naked through the, for example, mall. (If I am walking, or my brother, sister...)
- Everyone would laugh or thinking that I am mad.
But maybe is in other parts of the world different (except isolated and primitive tribes).

Nekowolf, can you inform us about your religion, gods, mythology?
I always loved to learn about ancient politeistic mythologies. They are interesting, educational and still popular. Is your religion modern politeistic or older?

And just one note - in Old Testament, almost everything is picturesquely described, especially Genesis.
Scholar
#88 Old 20th Apr 2010 at 10:01 PM
I would say because, in part, they better represent us as people. By putting us as a species to an impossible standard, godly perfection, why bother bettering yourself to that standard which can never be achieved? Take a look at how Jesus was represented. I'm not saying he is represented as perfect, but way damn better than any person I can imagine.

I mean, if we're supposed to be like Jesus, which seems to be a common teaching, why bother? You'll never reach that level. But when you have deities that are flawed, well, I think we learn better from them. I know it may seem like a bad comparison, but bear with me. Take Jesus, he helped people, he did all this stuff, and he said "do as I do," right? And that's great, but, and maybe this is my own ignorance, but I haven't really heard much of him actually learning. Hm, no, that's not quite what I mean. How to say it...it seems like when his story started, he knew all this stuff. So it comes off as preaching, "this is what you should do." But, in various mythologies, you learn more by the experiences of the gods and goddesses.

By comparison, let's take, say... Okay, let's take a look at Thor's journey into Utgard. I'll fast-forward through most of it to get to the ending. The biggest thing you need to know is that along the way, they picked up two mortal servants as compensation for something that had occurred, Thialfi and Roskva.

Nearing the end of the journey, they came to the hall of a giant king, named Utgard-Loki. Thor, Loki, and Thialfi were to demonstrate their greatest talents in three separate contests, one for each. The first was Loki versus the giant, Logi, in an eating contest. They were equally matched, and meat at the middle of the table, each having ate every scrap. But Logi had won, because not only every scrap, but he also ate the bones and the table as well.

Next was Thialfi, who was to compete against the giant, Hugi, in a race. In the first, Thialfi showed a strong competition, but still could not defeat Hugi, who had ran so fast he was able to turn around and greet Thialfi after reaching the finish. In the second race, Hugi won again, Thialfi even further behind than before. In the third race, once again, Hugi won, with Thialfi not even half-way.

Then came Thor, and he was to compete in a drinking contest. Utgard-Loki had called for a huge horn of mead to be given Thor, and proclaimed that to drink it in one draught (gulp) was good, some may take two to finish it, but no giants in his hall are feeble enough to need three draughts to finish it. Thor took a massive drink from the horn, until he could no longer breath. But it appeared like had only drank a little from it. After some belittling from Utgard-Loki, he took another swill, again until he had no breath, but it had seemed he had drank even less than before. After even more belittling, he had attempted for a third time, but like before, only made little headway in finishing it. Irritated by his inability to drink it, he had thrust the horn into the hands of a servant amid laughter of the giants in the hall. Furious, Thor declared he could prove himself in other ways.

Utgard-Loki suggested that he try a test that the young giants perform, lifting his cat from the floor. A large cat had came from underneath the king's throne and laid itself onto the floor. Thor put his arm around the cat and lifted, but the cat simply arched his back, paws never leaving the floor. At the insult of Utgard-Loki and the laughter of the other giants, he was absolutely furious and demanded another challenge. Utgard-Loki then asked for his foster-mother, Elli. A crippled old croon of a giant woman slowly came hobbling out, cane in hand. Utgard-Loki asked her to challenge Thor to a wrestling match, and she agreed, handing aside her cane. Thor charged at her, and grabbed her, but her appearance was deceiving as she fought back, the two of them locked together, neither budging. Thor tried with all his might, but she simply shrugged off his attempts, even trying for a hold or two. Then she took him by surprised, caught him into a lock and though he tried to take her down as well, he was eventually forced onto a knee. Utgard-Loki had seen enough and called it off. Afterward, he let the travelers spend a night in his hall.

They were up before all else in the early morning. As they were about to leave as the other giants slept, Utgard-Loki stirred and woke. He set up a table for them and woke some of his servants to bring them food and drink before they left, then showed them through the gates of Utgard. After a brief walk, he came to as far as he would go, but not before leaving them with a lesson.

He had asked Thor if the god had met anyone quite as powerful as he, Utgard-Loki. Thor conceded that he was seconded by Utgard-Loki, but added how the giant would likely boast about it the victory and how that irritated him. But the giant offered the truth. Had he known just how powerful Thor truly was, he was have never allowed Thor to enter his hall. He had used magic spells in order to trick Thor and his companions. Loki was ravenous and had ate very very fast. But he could not have won, because Logi was in fact wildfire itself, which consumes everything. Thailfi could not have won, for Hugi was Utgard-Loki's thoughts, and Thailfi had no hopes of winning against the speed of thought. And as for Thor, the giant was in truth astonished by how much Thor had drank, but he could not finish the horn, because the other end was actually in the sea; Thor was drinking the ocean itself. The cat was, in truth, Jormungand, the Midgard Serpent which encircled all of Midgard, biting his own tail. And Elli was, in truth, old age itself, something no man can defeat, because old age will come and take us all. Thor was enraged at the trickery, and grabbing Mjollnir, raised it far above his had to strike Utgard-Loki down. But it was too late as he had vanished. Hammer still in hand, Thor turned to strike the walls of Utgard, only to find that, like its king, the hall had completely disappeared as well.

Sorry it's so long, but, there was even more to this story Although this is a myth made primarily for entertainment, you could also learn from it. This is what I meant. We learn from the experiences of the gods in these stories, where as with the Bible, and again, apologies if it is my own ignorance on the subject, it seems to come across more as how you should act. Sure, it has stories, but it just doesn't seem to reach the same depth as a story like this. And I think it's partly because, as you read this, maybe it's just be but I can really relate to this on a more personal level. Think about the context of the story rather than the characters and its history. I hope I'm making sense! If not, just say so, and I'll try to clarify.


As for Ivan...

I'm a self-described Heathen. I say self-described, because I am neither a reconstructionist, nor have I taken any vows, though I am heavily Nordic-influenced. As you may guess already, it's about the Nordic mythology and culture. However, as I said, I'm not a reconstructionist, per say. Um, here, this can explain pagan reconstructionism better than I. I'm really not all that concerned with the reconstructionist aspects and ideology. I suppose the closest I'm towards would be Asatru (more correctly spelled Ásatrú). Furthermore, I don't necessarily believe in these tales as true, in the same context you see Jesus as real, rather I see them closer to lessons, stories, and the gods and goddesses of representations. Whether they actually exist in some form of manifestation, I have no idea. I would still honor and pray to them, nonetheless, so maybe I do believe in them in some context. Although, I do think there is -some- kind of afterlife, that much I'm willing to say. Uhm, I'm not really sure what else to say, to be honest. If you want a look into the Nordic mythology, you could either read the most famous source, the Prose Edda, written by Snorri Sturluson. A book I have which I find is also a very good read regarding Nordic mythology is, The Norse Myths, by Kevin Crossley Holland.

If you want, I suppose I could go into more detail about Nordic mythology specifically. Or I could recite some more stories.

Is that a shillelagh in your pocket, or are you just sinning against God?
Scholar
#89 Old 20th Apr 2010 at 11:08 PM
Quote: Originally posted by iCad
And I have to say that this is what ultimately turned me off of paganism, when I dabbled. Why offer worship/reverence/what-have-you to flawed beings that were/are just like us? For much the same reason, I don't understand ancestor worship. Many of my ancestors were really screwed-up people. Worthy of worship/reverence? Uh...no.


I agree with this point, but I also think that, no matter how much Christians will say it, there is no way that the Christian God is perfect, either.

The idea of any all-powerful being with human flaws is rather disconcerting. It would leave room for plenty of terrible, power-mad beings, as we have observed that it is part of human nature that power corrupts. It may be a more accurate description of the world, however, as an all-powerful, all-good God would theoretically not create a world with evil in it.

I think that, ultimately, there is nothing worthy of unquestioning worship, but that it is healthy to have moral exemplars. I would hesitate to imagine a god or gods as moral exemplars, but my moral exemplars are, frankly, about as arbitrary, considering that they consist of fictional characters and long-dead historical figures.

Quote: Originally posted by ivan17
Would anyone felt comfortable walking through the streets of New York naked, for example?

Personaly, it will be wrong, stupid, immoral, and disgraceful to walk naked through the, for example, mall. (If I am walking, or my brother, sister...)
- Everyone would laugh or thinking that I am mad.
But maybe is in other parts of the world different (except isolated and primitive tribes).


Nudity taboos are cultural. If we happened to live in a society that allowed people to walk around nude, you wouldn't be shocked by it. That's not to say that moral stances are culturally relative, but the idea of nudity being sinful is rather extreme. Having everyone walk around nude all the time would probably be a bad idea, but there has to be a happy middle ground. I think that it is better for us to wear clothing in everyday functions, but to not be so self-conscious about nudity. I don't know if that balance has been or can be reached on a societal level, but I think it is the ideal.

Quote: Originally posted by Nekowolf
I would say because, in part, they better represent us as people. By putting us as a species to an impossible standard, godly perfection, why bother bettering yourself to that standard which can never be achieved? Take a look at how Jesus was represented. I'm not saying he is represented as perfect, but way damn better than any person I can imagine.

I mean, if we're supposed to be like Jesus, which seems to be a common teaching, why bother? You'll never reach that level. But when you have deities that are flawed, well, I think we learn better from them. I know it may seem like a bad comparison, but bear with me. Take Jesus, he helped people, he did all this stuff, and he said "do as I do," right? And that's great, but, and maybe this is my own ignorance, but I haven't really heard much of him actually learning. Hm, no, that's not quite what I mean. How to say it...it seems like when his story started, he knew all this stuff. So it comes off as preaching, "this is what you should do." But, in various mythologies, you learn more by the experiences of the gods and goddesses.


Striving for perfection leads to self-betterment. I strive for moral and intellectual perfection and I think that it has made me a better person. I am aware that I won't achieve perfection, but, by striving for it, I will get closer to it than I would otherwise.

Saying "it can't happen so there's no use trying" is too indicative of defeat and apathy to me. It is what many people use as an excuse to do actively wrong things. I'm not saying that this is the case with you, but there are people who think that there is no point in holding oneself to any kind of standard simply because the standard will not be perfectly met. They then decide that they can do whatever they feel like, even if it's wrong.

Striving for perfection is emotionally difficult, but I think it is ultimately worth it. It pushes me to do better and to be a better person. If everyone did it, life would be a lot better for everyone.

I do understand your point about the teachings of Jesus, however. The Bible doesn't explain itself well on many moral points. I think it would do a lot better to use logic, as opposed to authority.
Undead Molten Llama
#90 Old 20th Apr 2010 at 11:05 PM
Quote: Originally posted by Nekowolf
I would say because, in part, they better represent us as people. By putting us as a species to an impossible standard, godly perfection, why bother bettering yourself to that standard which can never be achieved? Take a look at how Jesus was represented. I'm not saying he is represented as perfect, but way damn better than any person I can imagine.


I guess, for me at least, the point is not achieving at all. Because, for one thing, we're told from the get-go that we cannot live up to God's standards but also that Christians aren't expected to. That's the whole point of grace, which is defined as "undeserved forgiveness." We also get undeserved salvation, freely given, without having to work for it. So, it's really about trying to be as Christ-like as we can while here on Earth, not for our own glory, but simply because, for the moment, Christ isn't here to be Christ, so we Christians are supposed to be taking up His cross and following Him, as Scripture says. Christians are supposed to be doing His work. But as I've said, they tend to do it ass-backwards. In fact, they have a distinct tendency to become Pharisees, against whom Jesus rather vociferously spoke; much of what He did while on Earth was done to show them (and others) that they were wrong. And yet Christians nowadays...Yeah. Yippee.

Quote: Originally posted by Nekowolf
Sorry it's so long, but, there was even more to this story Although this is a myth made primarily for entertainment, you could also learn from it. This is what I meant. We learn from the experiences of the gods in these stories, where as with the Bible, and again, apologies if it is my own ignorance on the subject, it seems to come across more as how you should act.


Actually, no, but that is a really popular misconception. Most people can't get past the laws in the Torah, not realizing that, for Christians at least, they AREN'T a set of laws to live by but rather an object lesson. The purpose for the Law's inclusion in the Christian Bible isn't that Christians are supposed to be following it and/or judging other people by it, but merely to show us, clearly and objectively, how very far we are from God's standards. The inclusion of the Law is meant to show us, as Christians, WHY we need saving, and WHY Our Savior came to release us from the burden of the Law. (No, we don't need saving because of what Adam and Eve did, sillies. That, IMO, is overly-simple hogwash...although of course opinions on the subject of "Original Sin" vary.)

And MOST of the Bible characters are not people we're supposed to model ourselves on, at least not fully. Much of it is, indeed, myth, much like what you posted -- and thank your for that. (Because, you know, myth =/= false.) Most of the people portrayed in any depth in the Bible are object lessons, and many of them may or may not have actually existed. Many of them were massive screw-ups (Like, say, David, who deliberately had a man killed so that he could have his wife) yet who still, despite their screw-ups, found favor with/forgiveness from God. In this case, David ended up being an ancestor of the "fleshy" side of Christ. (Who is/was, indeed, a perfect, sinless being who didn't have anything to learn because He is/was God.) Then there's good old panicking, clueless Lot way back in Genesis, who screwed up a lot (HAH!), but who ultimately did what he was told and ended up prospering due to God's grace. Even Abraham, usually held up as a paragon, struggled mightily and often with doubting God's many promises to him, and so becomes a person with whom many people can identify, because MANY Christians struggle with doubt.

So perhaps the difference between me and you and other pagans, Neko, is that rather than embodying "role models" in gods/goddesses, I have them in mere human people like me. I and they are/were all of us screw-ups subject to the very same exacting, unchanging, yet ultimately forgiving and redeeming God. Seems to me that a lot of pagan paths just put gods/goddesses in the role model positions. Which is fine, but for me... Well, then I'm back to not seeing them as individuals to revere/worship, much like I don't revere/worship Abraham, although I do admire him.

So...yeah. That's about as deep as I get while high on codeine.

I'm mostly found on (and mostly upload to) Tumblr these days because, alas, there are only 24 hours in a day.
Muh Simblr! | An index of my downloads on Tumblr.
Scholar
#91 Old 20th Apr 2010 at 11:48 PM
Pharisees? Can't say I'm familiar. Anyhow, yeah. Then I suppose you could chalk it up to the norms they have set. Ideals vs. Reality? I suppose you could say it's harder to get that interpretation out of faiths like Wicca, Druidism, Asatru, but that's partly because there isn't really any "holy scripture" like the Bible. Maybe that's the core of it, then; the whole fictitious literalness and blind misinterpretation that some seem to employ, that I'd rather distance myself by being a different faith, I dunno.

But, part of it is also probably the same reason you're Christian; it works for you, you connect to it, it feels like a part of you. I feel the same way regarding my Nordic-based faith. And damn proud of it.

Anyhow, oh, well then, my apologies. I thought about it, and maybe it's because the Bible is too serious? XD No, seriously, it seems to be so solemn sometimes, it's depressing. Maybe they can't get over that and just give up? Or maybe just laziness. Ah, whatever. Anyhow, the concept of reverence and worship, well, it's a bit more complicated when you really look deeper into it, in part due to varying opinions about the nature of deities. Some do, some don't. Some see them as actual entities, some see them as representations or perspectives, some see them as facets of something greater. Some do put them as role models, while others put them more as something to learn from. Like anything else, there are a lot of differencing ideas.

I pretty much follow that they are representations of us, and that the mythology and the deities themselves are to be learned from rather than modeled. But, I'll still pray to them, because, well...hm, it's hard to describe. In a way, I suppose they are real in some context, and I'm not saying giving honor to them will necessarily change things, but it may, well, do something. Not divine, mind you, but something more personal inside of you. Reaffirmation of who you are, maybe?

Oh, and hope you feel better soon.


Now, as for Oaktree. Perhaps I should've said it differently. What I meant wasn't don't bother trying, but rather, don't try to reach perfection. Don't bother striving for that. You should learn new things to become more knowledgeable, you should do good things because it makes things better, you should do x to become/for the sake of y. Just to clarify that. My bad on the poor choice of words.

Is that a shillelagh in your pocket, or are you just sinning against God?
Undead Molten Llama
#92 Old 21st Apr 2010 at 1:32 AM
Quote: Originally posted by Nekowolf
Pharisees? Can't say I'm familiar.


The Pharisees were a sect of Judaism "in power" during the lifetime and ministry of Jesus. As I understand it (Jewish history post-Christ not exactly being my forte), they were actually the forerunners of modern, rabbinical Judaism, but at the time they were very Law-driven, following it to the letter, and they had the self-given authority to decide who was sinning and who wasn't, so they were very powerful. They came into conflict with Jesus because Jesus, though a "rabbi," wasn't really toeing the party line, so to speak. So, Pharisees are often portrayed in the Gospels as putting questions to Jesus, usually portrayed as doing so in order to ensnare Him so that they could convict Him and, in doing so, prevent people from believing Jesus to be Messiah. In short, most of the strongest words that Jesus ever spoke, at least of those words that were recorded in the Gospels, were spoken to or about Pharisees, usually denouncing their interpretations of the Law.

Over time, to call a person a pharisee (Small "p") became to call them self-righteous and hypocritical, all too willing to loudly point out the sins of others while ignoring one's own honking huge ones. Sound familiar?

Quote:
Maybe that's the core of it, then; the whole fictitious literalness and blind misinterpretation that some seem to employ, that I'd rather distance myself by being a different faith, I dunno.


I can certainly understand that. I separate myself from people like that, too, for all that I am Christian. But consider this: You are separating yourself from people who are, in essence, doin' it wrong, not from anything that the faith truly espouses. Realizing this was a turning point in my own spiritual path...but as I've said elsewhere we all have our spiritual paths to walk and far be it from me to impede anyone's path because God knows that my own was convoluted enough.

Quote:
I thought about it, and maybe it's because the Bible is too serious? XD No, seriously, it seems to be so solemn sometimes, it's depressing. Maybe they can't get over that and just give up? Or maybe just laziness.


*laughs* It is a big, fat book, after all. And most people -- Christians included! -- seem to "know" what it says without actually reading it. That's one of its magical properties, I guess.

I agree that it's not the most lighthearted read out there, though. Other mythology is probably far more fun and full of adventure without as much weighty language and without tedious rule lists. But then, there's always "Song of Solomon." It has a deeper allegorical meaning, but on the surface it certainly reads like love poetry, complete with lots of talking about boobies and opening up to one's beloved.

Quote:
I pretty much follow that they are representations of us, and that the mythology and the deities themselves are to be learned from rather than modeled. But, I'll still pray to them, because, well...hm, it's hard to describe. In a way, I suppose they are real in some context, and I'm not saying giving honor to them will necessarily change things, but it may, well, do something. Not divine, mind you, but something more personal inside of you. Reaffirmation of who you are, maybe?


Prayer IS hard to describe, isn't it? For me, it's a connection to God, an opportunity to express to Him my thoughts and feelings. True, He knows all of what I tell Him already, but I think He also knows the power, for us, of expressing those things "out loud." So, I can see what you mean.

I guess, in the end, I connect with Christianity because I've always been convinced that there is something bigger out there, but I am also, by upbringing/conditioning, something of a skeptic. (I know, odd combination.) Christianity has Scripture that I can test and mountains of scholarly study that has been done. Logic can be applied to belief. So, yes, there is an element of "fit" involved, I suppose. It's all part of finding one's path.

And now...Off to commune with my sex offender friends.

I'm mostly found on (and mostly upload to) Tumblr these days because, alas, there are only 24 hours in a day.
Muh Simblr! | An index of my downloads on Tumblr.
Lab Assistant
#93 Old 21st Apr 2010 at 9:17 AM
Nekowolf, I am not much informed about Norse mythology and I have heard about few gods - Odin, Thor, Loki and Frejya. I think that you are doing positive thing, you are saving your roots and I think that it is great.
Norse mythology reminds me on slavic mythology, but I am fan of Egyptian.
I can't imagine how is great to return to life almost forgoten religion, I hope that it is almost like finding lost treasure.
I'm not interested much in "our" slavic mythology because our national origin is still questionable. Some say that we are from: Germany, Poland, Arabian Peninsula (Persia, Israel), even from Egypt and there are some interesting and logic solutions for every option.
It's great to hear that you are believing in the after life. I really don't know what is the purpose of life of the individual who doesn't believe in it.
Personaly, I believe in Heaven, but I don't believe in hell. Why? Because it is contradictory of good and graceful God/Yahweh.
I read one book about "3 Churches" in my religion. First is traveling Church - this one on the world. Second is suffering Church - Purgatory. Third is glory Church - Kingdom of Heaven. It's hard to translate on English and maybe sounds stupid because book wasn't on English language.
Maybe is not important which religion are we. I think that we just need to live moral and honest life.
icad,

Quote:
Prayer IS hard to describe, isn't it? For me, it's a connection to God, an opportunity to express to Him my thoughts and feelings. True, He knows all of what I tell Him already, but I think He also knows the power, for us, of expressing those things "out loud." So, I can see what you mean.


This is very nice explanation of prayer and I agree with you.
My prayer is composed with 2 parts. First is prayer, for example, Our Father and second is thanking to God, talking with Him, etc.
Scholar
#94 Old 21st Apr 2010 at 12:10 PM Last edited by Nekowolf : 21st Apr 2010 at 7:28 PM.
Yeah, for the most part, the most people know about Norse mythology is Ragnarök, aka. The Most Awesome Epic Battle EVER! And a few of the dieties, pretty much the ones you mentioned: Odin, Freyja, Thor, and Loki. Maybe Baldur. I cannot say how many people know of Yggdrasil, the World Tree. Rarely do I hear about some of the other gods, like Freyr, Tyr, Sif, Heimdall, or Njord. And never about Idun, who kept golden apples that protected them all from aging (in one tale, Idun and her apples were stolen, and they all aged very quickly until they were crippled and could barely hear or see, with some of them going senile).

EDIT:

Quote: Originally posted by iCad
Prayer IS hard to describe, isn't it?

Yes, yes it is. It's like trying to teach my sister Euchre /inside joke.

Is that a shillelagh in your pocket, or are you just sinning against God?
Lab Assistant
#95 Old 22nd Apr 2010 at 9:19 AM
What do You think about Creationism?
Scholar
#96 Old 22nd Apr 2010 at 11:54 AM Last edited by Nekowolf : 22nd Apr 2010 at 4:03 PM.
To be frank, absolutely ridiculous. I suppose I could get the very beginning, before the Big Bang (people seem to confuse the Big Bang with the very start of the universe; not so), but I stick with "who the hell knows." But after that, I'm all science, in terms of creation.

I really don't want to get into the merits of it here, but to be brief:

I've argued with atheists, those who say there cannot possibly be any form of deity, because no evidence exists. Nor do we have any for, either, really, aside from subjective thought of personal experience and opinion. Like, something could happen which to you "prove" the existence of some greater entity. But that's not really evidence aside for yourself.

You cannot simply ignore the merits of one completely for the other. And that means you cannot ignore the merits of scientific studies and their research, which do have a great deal of evidence that the world is beyond 6000 years old. So the whole Creationist argument that God created the Earth that many years ago is bunk as far as I'm concerned.

Is that a shillelagh in your pocket, or are you just sinning against God?
Mad Poster
#97 Old 22nd Apr 2010 at 7:10 PM
Nekowolf, I'd be interested to know where you think you fall on the continuum in this article (sorry... it's a bit long at 12 pages, but quite interesting, I think).
Scholar
#98 Old 22nd Apr 2010 at 8:29 PM Last edited by Nekowolf : 22nd Apr 2010 at 9:10 PM.
Certainly. Just give me some time to read it and I'll get back to you.

EDIT: Okay, reading it, hmmm...I'd have to say, I think I'd probably fall with the Progressive Darwinists. As for the most critical, I think actually, I'd say both Intelligent Designers and, believe it or not, Transhumanists.

Is that a shillelagh in your pocket, or are you just sinning against God?
Lab Assistant
#99 Old 22nd Apr 2010 at 9:23 PM
For me, there's too much randomness in Darwin's theory.
Undead Molten Llama
#100 Old 22nd Apr 2010 at 10:57 PM
Quote: Originally posted by ivan17
For me, there's too much randomness in Darwin's theory.


....Such as? (Assuming that this is an OK topic for this thread, of course. )

As to what I think of Creationism... Well, first you have to specify what sort of creationism. Young Earth? Old Earth? Progressive? Just "Intelligent Design?"

Assuming that you're talking about young-earth Creationism, because that's what most people talk about...Well, my stance as an ex-Catholic born-again Christian with some strange -- to fellow born-agains -- ideas is that it's a steaming pile of poo.

I'm mostly found on (and mostly upload to) Tumblr these days because, alas, there are only 24 hours in a day.
Muh Simblr! | An index of my downloads on Tumblr.
 
Page 4 of 24
Back to top