Comic Genesis Forums

BriHahn wrote:Please don't tell me that's what you think I believe. I stated several times that I don't think the antiquated laws written in the Bible are useful, but if you look at the stories and see how the people in them reacted to certain situations, you can learn useful things. Under no circumstances do I think the Bible is a perfect guide for life, but there is good in it. It much resembles people, in that respect; we're none of us perfect, but there is good in all of us (even if it's buried way way WAY deep where no one ever sees it). That's what I look for when I look at what the Bible can tell us; what is useful, what makes sense to me, what I can honestly look at and say, "yes, I can believe that." It won't be the same as others, but it doesn't have to be.

Perhaps another example: Judges 19:22-29

22 While they were enjoying themselves, some of the wicked men of the city surrounded the house. Pounding on the door, they shouted to the old man who owned the house, "Bring out the man who came to your house so we can have sex with him."

23 The owner of the house went outside and said to them, "No, my friends, don't be so vile. Since this man is my guest, don't do this disgraceful thing. 24 Look, here is my virgin daughter, and his concubine. I will bring them out to you now, and you can use them and do to them whatever you wish. But to this man, don't do such a disgraceful thing."

The owner of the house offers his daughter and his guest's concubine to gang rapists, rather than the male guest? WTF? This level of bizarre shit is not unusual in the bible. If there is goodness in that book, you have to look hard for it.

Oh, alright. I'm being facetious. Most of the bizarre shit is in the old testament. Nonetheless, if one wants wisdom, one is better off watching Star Trek then filtering a few nuggets from the weirdness of the bible. No, seriously. At least it's easier to find the good insight and wisdom because you're not furious at the numerous atrocites masquerading as morality, the god being a sadistic wanker and that people earnestly belief this is an example of benevolance. Put your faith in Star Trek. It's got plenty of miracles and the protaganists behave decently more often.

squidflakes wrote:Finally, I think Linkara nailed it when he said that he takes comfort in knowing that something greater than him is looking out for his well-being, no matter how remote this something might be, and I think that's the ultimate hook for organized, monotheistic religion. You get all the mental safety and comfort of rules, regulations, and ceremony along with the sense of a final, ultimate authority. In essence, you get an ego driven construct of a super-parent who you can never disappoint.

Umm... the super parent can be more than disappointed and into raging fury. In the christian and islamic religions, he issues the ultimate in bed-without-supper punishment: torture for eternity. You can take comfort only if you what you're told. Disagree without remorse and you'll burn. Hope your friends are devout just like you or you have to live with the fact that they'll burn. Where do you think the phrase 'god-fearing' came from? Why do you think the height of christianity, when the church was integral to the lives of everyone in Europe, were known as the Dark Ages?

kite-san wrote:Linkara, if you are going to disown the fantatics, you need to change books. like it or not, the book regarded as holy by Christianity, as well as that regarded as holy by Judaism, or Islam (can't speak for others, ain't read 'em) have lengthy parts on killing the outsiders of to make way for the true kingdom of god. if it's holy, it's ALL holy, and if it's the word of god, it's ALL the word of god. even the nasty bits about butchering the infidel and raping his womenfolk so that their history is not a c omplete waste because the holiness of the rapist will overcome the unclean blood and the children will be of the proper faith.

Actually, I do not regard the Bible as a "holy book." Nor do I believe in the concept of "holy land." No person's dirt is any more valuable than any other's dirt. It doesn't matter if it was consecrated by Jesus or not, it's still dirt. In that regard, as I've said before, the Bible was written by MANY people and in a different time period with different laws and standards. If I believed it was the direct word of God, then it would be a holy book, infallable and perfect. But I don't for the stated reasons of its imperfection. As such, I disown the fanatics because they believe it is all holy and needs to be interpreted as such. I take in the parts that I believe have value in it.

For example, my favorite book in the world is "The Once and Future King." However, many times the characters in the book act in a way that I do not like. Does it take away from my liking of the book? No, it's simply a critique of something based on my own personal foibles and beliefs. In the example you give, I dislike the parts about killing the infidels and raping their womenfolk and coming out "clean" as a result of it. I think those parts of the book are terrible and I do not agree with them.

kite-san wrote: Admittedly, Christianity and Islam have, whether they admit it or not, implicitly indicated that the big beard in the sky is capable of changing his/her/its transcendent mind, as the torah was supposed to be the word of god, and then there's the new books.

Christianity -cannot- seek to be judged independently of its fanatics until Testament III retocons (prolly misspelled) out the nasty parts, because according to your current Word of God, the fanatics are RIGHT.

The problem is that people have tried to create new holy books (Church of Latter Day Saints, anyone?), but they have the same problem as the first two testaments: they say things that either most people disagree with, or because they're more recent, people can roll their eyes more in the idea that God or someone representing God spoke to them. I know I do, because I don't think God acts like that. I think God inspires people in different ways than through direct communication. As God said in a Futurama episode, "When you do things right, people won't know you've done anything at all."

And why was it called the Dark Ages? Because people believed they would get sick if they bathed. I.e., people were idiots, putting themselves COMPLETELY into faith while ignoring that the world around them does have some truths that they don't need to look to God for. God set up the world so that we'd be able to function without having to turn to him every five seconds to ask for advice. As a result, lots of peple died from plagues and superstition and what happens when your religion becomes the only thing revelant in your life.

Edit: Double post, sorry.

warmachine wrote:

BriHahn wrote:Please don't tell me that's what you think I believe. I stated several times that I don't think the antiquated laws written in the Bible are useful, but if you look at the stories and see how the people in them reacted to certain situations, you can learn useful things. Under no circumstances do I think the Bible is a perfect guide for life, but there is good in it. It much resembles people, in that respect; we're none of us perfect, but there is good in all of us (even if it's buried way way WAY deep where no one ever sees it). That's what I look for when I look at what the Bible can tell us; what is useful, what makes sense to me, what I can honestly look at and say, "yes, I can believe that." It won't be the same as others, but it doesn't have to be.

Perhaps another example: Judges 19:22-29

22 While they were enjoying themselves, some of the wicked men of the city surrounded the house. Pounding on the door, they shouted to the old man who owned the house, "Bring out the man who came to your house so we can have sex with him."

23 The owner of the house went outside and said to them, "No, my friends, don't be so vile. Since this man is my guest, don't do this disgraceful thing. 24 Look, here is my virgin daughter, and his concubine. I will bring them out to you now, and you can use them and do to them whatever you wish. But to this man, don't do such a disgraceful thing."

The owner of the house offers his daughter and his guest's concubine to gang rapists, rather than the male guest? WTF? This level of bizarre shit is not unusual in the bible. If there is goodness in that book, you have to look hard for it.

Oh, alright. I'm being facetious. Most of the bizarre shit is in the old testament. Nonetheless, if one wants wisdom, one is better off watching Star Trek then filtering a few nuggets from the weirdness of the bible. No, seriously. At least it's easier to find the good insight and wisdom because you're not furious at the numerous atrocites masquerading as morality, the god being a sadistic wanker and that people earnestly belief this is an example of benevolance. Put your faith in Star Trek. It's got plenty of miracles and the protaganists behave decently more often.

Thanks, but I prefer Christopher Pike, as I stated in my post.

In all seriousness though; I get what you're saying, I do. But I still think there is good to be found in the Bible, and if I have to search, I will, because I happen to think it's worthwhile. It may not be to you, but everyone has different perspectives, and this just happens to be mine.


In regards to some of the other things mentioned in this thread... how many of you have heard of Unitarian Universalism? It's an organized religion in the sense of it collects money to fund it's churches and constantly seeks new members... but that's pretty much where the similarity ends. One of the things I am beyond proud of in my church is that we accept everyone, regardless of their race, sex, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, etc, so long as they can follow one simple directive: You are on your own, individual spiritual journey. Your neighbor is on his/her own, individual spiritual journey. You may not have the same views, but that is all right, because we welcome all with open arms. If you cannot welcome your neighbor and his/her views with open arms, and try to fight with them to get them to believe what you want to believe, then you are most likely in the wrong place.

Actually, the covenant says it better, and I quote:
"We, the member congregations of the Unitarian Universalist Association, covenant to affirm and promote:
The inherent worth and dignity of every person.
Justice, equity and compassion in human relations
Acceptance of one another and rencouragement to spirirtual growth in our congregations.
A free and responsible search for truth and meaning.
The right of conscience and the use of the democractic process within our congregations and in society at large.
The goal of world community, with peace, liberty, and justice for all.
Respect for the interdependent web of all existence, of which we all are a part."


I hope that eases some fears about at least one "organized religion". My best friend is a Pagan Wicca. I know several atheists who still attended services at my old church. One of our ministers (we had two) was a regular practitioner of Buddhist and Zen rituals. One of the ministers at my mother's church makes a study of the Bible (and not in the religious zealot way) and preaches in an unbiased fashion about what she finds. We've had former Baptists, former Methodists, people from Islamic backgrounds, and countless other religions come to our church because of the message of tolerance we try to promote.

As for me, I am from a "christian" background; I was confirmed as a Methodist when I was younger, but I much prefer Unitarianism these days. I always make an effort to learn about the religions of the world (and especially now, since my specialty is intelligence analysis, and unfortunately religious zealotism (is that a word?) is on the rise and is the professed cause behind many terrorist attacks, but that's neither here nor there) and see if there's anything else that makes sense to me. I've only been told I was going to hell twice, thankfully, but honestly, if there's any type of person I could actively dislike, if not outright hate, it's the zealots of any religion. I'm a firm believer in moderation when it comes to religion and a few other things, but religion most importantly (at least in this post), so zealots are often people I try to moderate as much as I can, but they irritate me immensely when they don't listen.

Okay, got off topic there; sorry. My main point behind the long ramble is, I suppose, that not all religion is bad. A very tiny fraction of most religions are the idiots, but hey, we're human. I can't help but think after a lifetime of observing the human condition that being idiots is a trait that is bred into everyone, it's just that it comes out more in certain people than it does others. I know I've acted like an idiot in the past over some stupid shit, and I'm sure I will again in the future, but at least I try to listen to all sides of an issue; they don't even give us that much leeway. But please don't judge all religion on the basis of a tiny fraction of religious people. I try not to do that myself, even though every day we hear about another suicide bomber attack overseas; I just keep repeating to myself, it's not a regular Muslim's fault. It's the zealots who make everyone's lives miserable, not the vast majority. Place blame on them if you want, but please don't lump everyone who has religion into that category. That's all I ask.

Okay, I am shutting up now; that is a fucking LONG post.

*muses to herself*

Actually Jetsetlemming, my Grandfather believes in evolution (you know, the Christian Anglican Reverend I mentioned pages ago) has done so for as long as I remember....

Why is the only notable movement against Evolution based in the USA's Bible belt? What makes them that extra bit wacky? People would laugh if you suggested the alternatives being taught in a science class where I come from... Religion, at a stretch, but science, no way...

Any suggestions?

Jetsetlemming wrote:
The secular view of the universe and life is tiny, detail-less, and severly lacking.

Oh man, life must be very boring for you. Believe me when I say that my life is full of detail and wonder without the trappings of religion.

I have to ask though, you actually think that just because some people don't have a deity, that somehow this makes life less detailed or interesting for them? That the lack of faith means they lack a sense of wonder?

If you were a christian, and went up to your pastor or priest and said "I believe in evolution!", you know how he'd react?

Well, if you were a member of an Assemblies of God church, Pentecostal, Southern Baptist, or a majority of the megachurches, your pastor would probably try to sell you their latest book full of junk science and logically flawed appeal to authority arguments refuting evolution, then recommend you get some sort of help from the church in changing your mind.

Linkara wrote:Bear in mind, René Descartes, the father of Rationalism, believed in God and even went out of his way to explain through reason that God existed.

Deeply, profoundly flawed reason leading to very bad arguments. Just because he was a Rationalist doesn't mean his logic was airtight.

Jetsetlemming wrote:If you've got some evidence that God doesn't exist, and that all religon is false, I'd love to see it.

You don't need any evidence to not believe something. In circumstances where there is a lack of evidence to support an assertion (say, the existence of elves), we do not usually say "Well, there could be elves, or there could not be elves. Both propositions are equally reasonable and we must give them equal credence." We certainly don't say, "Well, we haven't proved there aren't elves, so elves there must be!" Most people would be inclined to say, "I've never seen an elf. No reliable source has ever claimed to see an elf. So elves don't exist."

Jetsetlemming wrote:The secular view of the universe and life is tiny, detail-less, and severly lacking. There are a ton of things left unexplained, and unexplored.

The only reasonable reply to this is "sez you". I have no problem living a secular life, and in fact I think God is a limiting factor to expanding our consciousness.
Of course things are unexplained and unexplored. I think that's pretty fucking cool, that we have so much to learn and discover. God, bluntly, is boring. The answer to any question is always "God", and therefore, no answer at all. "Why do we get sick?" "Goddidit." "Well, what can we do about it?" "Turn to God." "I tried, it didn't work. I wonder why." "Burn the heretic!"

If you were a christian, and went up to your pastor or priest and said "I believe in evolution!", you know how he'd react? By excommunicating you? Nope. Killing you? Throwing you in jail? Torturing you? Not those either.

Some religious sects will excommunicate you for that, actually.

He'd debate you. He'd talk to you reasonably.

Or he'd tell me I was going to Hell for believing Satanic lies. But, y'know, reasonably.

Christian leaders specifically study these issues, because they KNOW they're gonna be asked about them time and time again. Despite not only being religous, but leaders of a religous group, they still study scientific issues that, apparently, you believe all those of faith are blind to.

I have never, ever talked to a person who didn't believe in evolution who demonstrated any genuine understanding or in-depth study of biology. All evolution deniers I have had the, er, pleasure of hearing discourse on the subject distort and outright lie.
Furthermore, when it comes down to whose authority is greater, I think I will side with people who have studied the subject as a career, and not some priest who thinks he's hot shit because he read "Mere Christianity".

squidflakes wrote: I have to ask though, you actually think that just because some people don't have a deity, that somehow this makes life less detailed or interesting for them? That the lack of faith means they lack a sense of wonder?

In some ways, I'd have to say yes. People who frequent the main ComicGenesis forums may have seen when I expressed surprise that Enedlammenniel (sp?), creator of the webcomic Tile, was an atheist.

It's not that I don't believe that atheists have a sense of wonder or majesty. Far from it, as demonstrated here and by the creator of that wholly awesome comic that just screams "WHIMSY!" at you. ^_^ The thing is, a lot of atheistic writing that I've read tends to steer away from the wondrous and fantastic, opting instead to focus on "the real," "The serious," or other similar things that focus on life as it exists in the here and now, which doesn't tend to bring to mind a lot of wonder in the world.

If anything, it's a stereotype and for that I apologize since I'm guilty of believing it sometimes. Again, my apologies for it and I'll try to keep in mind that people can see such things and not have to believe in "higher beings." ^_^

Douglas Adams was pretty damn whimsical...

Linkara wrote:If anything, it's a stereotype and for that I apologize since I'm guilty of believing it sometimes. Again, my apologies for it and I'll try to keep in mind that people can see such things and not have to believe in "higher beings." ^_^

Some of us don't have a choice when it comes to seeing such things!

Ah, the joys of being mentally ill.

As it somewhat relates to this conversation, I will tell you a story.

A couple years ago, I was introduced to the team of a fairly popular Half-Life mod, which was/is being converted into a Half-Life 2 mod. A member of the team is a friend of mine, and my rather extensive knowledge of early twentieth century weaponry lead me to being rather useful to the team.

I spent a bit of time talking with the mod's creator, who seemed to be a fairly rational being. Nice, calm, talkative; we were really starting to accomplish things for his project. Through some series of events, however, the topic of mental illness came up.

I happen to have a schizotypal mental illness, which can cause hallucinations and the like. When I mentioned this to him, his personality changed. He started asking me questions about my faith and the faith of my parents, then told me that I didn't need to see a psychiatrist or take my medication. According to him, the cause of my illness was demonic spirits that have entered my body because I lost my faith and because I have a catholic mother and a baptist father.

In the end, I had to leave the project. He would barely speak to me and when he did it was angry and hurtful things. It saddened me because I really thought we were getting things done and something like that had to change it all.

It hurt.

Wow....wow

I don't really know what to say to that JohnnyTwoEyes... 'Though in regards to that guy the definition of "crazy" seems ass over tit.

...arrgh... just got home, and I have peple coming over.

I'll try to catch up tomorrow.


bon discussion

Indigo Violent wrote:Douglas Adams was pretty damn whimsical...

See, I was never quite sure what his religious beliefs were, nor did it really matter to me to find out. ^^;;

And ouch, I say, Johnny. There's some Dark Age theory of medicine right there...

Linkara wrote:

Indigo Violent wrote:Douglas Adams was pretty damn whimsical...

See, I was never quite sure what his religious beliefs were, nor did it really matter to me to find out. ^^;;

Atheist. I highly recommend The Salmon of Doubt, if you haven't read it - he very firmly and clearly asserts that he believes there is no God and religion is a lot of damned nonsense (well, believed, anyway, having been dead for half a decade...)

And ouch, I say, Johnny. There's some Dark Age theory of medicine right there...

Gotta agree with you there. Scary, fucked-up shit, my friend.

Linkara wrote:In the heroine thing, it's not okay for a few reasons. One, the drugs themselves are manufactured by people who have the express intent to do harm by selling a product that will eventually kill the user, be it through a physical death or by a loss of self (the fact that a drug can destroy someone's life through their addiction).

Me thinks you accidentally switched around religion and heroin here. Heroin is not sold with the express intent to harm and kill the user. A dead customer is a bad customer, he doesn't bring in any money... Religion on the other hand - it may once have been an attempt to explain things that we don't understand, but at least since the dark ages, it has been a tool for controlling people by keeping them from understanding.

Linkara wrote:Two, by using said drugs, it makes it difficult if not highly unlikely that they will be able to continue interacting with others of whom have taken that person to be a part of their existence, thus harming other people's lives, as well.

You're talking about fundamentalist religious people here, right? Jehovas witnesses are famous for exactly that - forcing their members to cut their connections to non-members. And from what I hear, fundamental christians in the US are just as bad.

Indigo Violent wrote:You don't need any evidence to not believe something. In circumstances where there is a lack of evidence to support an assertion (say, the existence of elves), we do not usually say "Well, there could be elves, or there could not be elves. Both propositions are equally reasonable and we must give them equal credence." We certainly don't say, "Well, we haven't proved there aren't elves, so elves there must be!" Most people would be inclined to say, "I've never seen an elf. No reliable source has ever claimed to see an elf. So elves don't exist."

Reminds me of this one: http://brentrasmussen.com/log/node/363 (site is down right now, but the link should be correct). "What it feels like to be an atheist".

Well, it is sold with the intent to harm by making them addicted to it, and in that way is also controlling of people, since it forced them to physically depend on the drug.

And in reference to fundamentalists, as I mentioned before, they don't represent the group as a whole. After all, I'm a Christian and I never tell people to sever ties with people who don't believe in the same things they do. ^_~

and you still fail to see the point that by taking the same label as them, without in your taking of it stating that you feel them to -not be Christian- (not feel that they're a separate sect, not that they have a different interpretation, but that they are completely, assed out wrong and have no right to do the things that they do, no right to the labels they claim) you link yourself to them.

also, you have made one of the biggest (and most common) logical fallacies in an arguement about ideology. "I identify myself as X, and am nice about it, therefore X is in general nice." doesn't hold up. I don't think anyone here has tried to say 'heroin is good' the point we've been making is that Big Religion's bad moments as the father beating up the wife and raping little Sally (if we want to carpetbag, Torquemada was a nice moment, in more recent times, Phelps&company suit just dandily)end up just as damaging, if not more so.

The easy (and wrong) thing to as would be nobody's ever gone to war over drug-of-choice. they have, but at least it was a war where everybody involved knew the only goal behind it was money, rather than selling it to the flock with 'words from on high' when the real goal is mundane money and power. *cough*God's candidate*cough*

Just to muddy the waters a little Kite-San, there are "rebels" from Myannmar that state their motives for guerilla warefare are patriotic and in support/against the Junta (depending on which faction they belong to) however the reality of the situation is that they are just trying to keep the illegal opium, heroin (and now anphetamine) trade routes and farms/processing plants open for (as you say) monetary reasons.

Guerilla factions from all sides of the Golden Triangle regularly use partriotic and/or revolutionary rehtoric to support their propagation and trade of these drugs across their countries boarders.

Anyways, I'm just shit-stirring, I pretty much do agree with what you said

Linkara wrote:The thing is, a lot of atheistic writing that I've read tends to steer away from the wondrous and fantastic, opting instead to focus on "the real," "The serious," or other similar things that focus on life as it exists in the here and now, which doesn't tend to bring to mind a lot of wonder in the world.

Well, you could say them same about stuff written by people who "believe." It's kind of like eating food prepared by a Vegetarian. Coming at the problem from the wrong direction. Now, good food that happens to be vegetarian, like Indian cuisine, is a whole different matter.

In the US people who don't want to be rude or get into arguments do not identify themselves as atheists because those who do believe get just so offended by the thought of someone not buying into their belief system. I'm sure you know more atheists than you think.

I live in Japan, a country well known for whimsy. Guess what, very few people here believe in "God". Neither Shinto nor Buddhism has a central god figure. Honor earlier declared that Buddhism is not a religion - I think the priest at the temple down the street would disagree but she has a point - there's no god or even supernatural beings in Buddhism. On the other hand one of my Hindu friends has asserted that Buddhism is simply streamlined Hinduism.

In any case, if your idea of an atheist is formed based on people who loudly proclaim themselves to be atheists, yah, you'll be thinking of some fairly humorless people.