Noah's Ark

[luke warm]

And the ending was only happy for Noah, his family, and the two of each animal he packed onto the Ark. Not so happy for all other animals and people in the world, though. Was everyone else so evil that they deserved to die?

that isn't quite correct, but there is a moral there... no, the rest died because they didn't believe God... christians believe the same thing will happen again one day (without the flood)

[jdonn]

And the ending was only happy for Noah, his family, and the two of each animal he packed onto the Ark.  Not so happy for all other animals and people in the world, though.  Was everyone else so evil that they deserved to die?

that isn't quite correct, but there is a moral there... no, the rest died because they didn't believe God... christians believe the same thing will happen again one day (without the flood)

If most of the population of the world is wiped out, I'm quite sure it will be by someone who believes in god (I don't necessarily mean the christian god of course.)

[helene_t]

Fortunately most Christians don't believe in such nonsense. Oh well, one could argue about what it means to be "Christian". I mean, people who consider themselves Christian.

[Lobowolf]

Oh well, one could argue about what it means to be "Christian". I mean, people who consider themselves Christian.

I'd imagine it would pertain to that whole "Jesus as the son of God...only way to eternal salvation" kinda thing. But what do I know; I was surprised to find how many self-described atheists believe in God.

[hrothgar]

Oh well, one could argue about what it means to be "Christian". I mean, people who consider themselves Christian.

I'd imagine it would pertain to that whole "Jesus as the son of God...only way to eternal salvation" kinda thing. But what do I know; I was surprised to find how many self-described atheists believe in God.

You should see some of the fun threads from a couple years back where DrTodd was explaining that Catholics aren't Christians....

[jdonn]

Oh well, one could argue about what it means to be "Christian". I mean, people who consider themselves Christian.

I'd imagine it would pertain to that whole "Jesus as the son of God...only way to eternal salvation" kinda thing. But what do I know; I was surprised to find how many self-described atheists believe in God.

I think technically I'm an athiest and that technically I'm jewish. And in a very fortunate stroke of luck, I'm technically apathetic about the whole thing.

[Lobowolf]

Oh well, one could argue about what it means to be "Christian". I mean, people who consider themselves Christian.

I'd imagine it would pertain to that whole "Jesus as the son of God...only way to eternal salvation" kinda thing. But what do I know; I was surprised to find how many self-described atheists believe in God.

I think technically I'm an athiest and that technically I'm jewish. And in a very fortunate stroke of luck, I'm technically apathetic about the whole thing.

There is the whole "religious Judaism" v. "cultural Judaism" (or even the matrilineal "ethnic Judaism") thing. But I have a really hard time imagining what a Christian would be other than one who has a religious belief about eternal salvation through Jesus etc.

 

Though I was pleasantly reminded by all this of the old Sam Kinison bit... "Rock Against Drugs?! What genius thought that one up. What's next, Christians Against Christ?!"

[Lobowolf]

You should see some of the fun threads from a couple years back where DrTodd was explaining that Catholics aren't Christians....

I'm not even going to pretend to be a little bit sorry to have missed THAT.

[Phil]

The motivation should be pretty clear cut...

 

(snip)...

 

I think that pinning them down and seeing whether they believe in the literal truth of some of the more outlandish pieces of the Bible might have some bearing on the reliability of their analysis in other areas.

Funny.

 

My maternal grandfather was a raving rascist and anti-semite, although he was very well read and self-taught. But hate just oozed from his pores, you know. Whenever he got the opportunity, he would love to engage people (like my Dad) with questions like,

 

"Are Jews a race or just a religion"?

 

Of course he really didn't give a crap one way or another, but questions like this gave him an opportunity to talk about his hatred of the jews. Whatever side the victim would take, he would take the other, and the discussion would just run on into the evening.

 

This thread kind of reminds me of him.

[hrothgar]

The motivation should be pretty clear cut...

 

(snip)...

 

I think that pinning them down and seeing whether they believe in the literal truth of some of the more outlandish pieces of the Bible might have some bearing on the reliability of their analysis in other areas.

Funny.

 

My maternal grandfather was a raving rascist and anti-semite, although he was very well read and self-taught. But hate just oozed from his pores, you know. Whenever he got the opportunity, he would love to engage people (like my Dad) with questions like,

 

"Are Jews a race or just a religion"?

 

Of course he really didn't give a crap one way or another, but questions like this gave him an opportunity to talk about his hatred of the jews. Whatever side the victim would take, he would take the other, and the discussion would just run on into the evening.

 

This thread kind of reminds me of him.

I'd argue that there is a fundamental difference between confronting people openly and in their face and holding private little bitch sessions behind their back.

 

Jimmy and DrTodd are quite aware how I feel about their religion and their politics. They are in a position to respond as they see fit. (More over, I'd argue that they instigate an awful lot of what goes on)

 

I wonder if your bridge clients know that you (subtlety) mock/deprecate their performance on these forums?

[helene_t]

There is the whole "religious Judaism" v. "cultural Judaism" (or even the matrilineal "ethnic Judaism") thing. But I have a really hard time imagining what a Christian would be other than one who has a religious belief about eternal salvation through Jesus etc.

I haven't asked many of my christian friends and relative about the details of their belief, but for some it seems to be sufficient in order to call themselves "christians" just to celebrate christian holidays and maybe believe in a few of the things, at least allegorically, or just to be agnostic w.r.t. them.

 

A poll once (in the late 80s) showed that 20% of Danes believed in a life after death. My guess would be that a substantial part of those are either moslems or believe in some home-grown or new-age kind of reincanation. So it is probably safe to say that less than 15% of members of the lutheran church believe in salvation. How many of the members of the lutheran church call themselves "christians" I dunno, my guess would be between 60% and 90% but that is pure guesswork. There might have been some polls about it.

[Al_U_Card]

I am so glad that others were given this cross to bear (pun intended) :lol:

 

My parents told us that religion was a personal preference that was best decided after obtaining the age of majority along with the ability to process the implications without suffering the burden on shoulders unable to deal with it.

 

Being free of any given inclination meant being able to see everyone's point of view without prejudice. It also led to some interesting discussions. :blink:

[onoway]

I found this funny.. the nature of the thread and all..

" the yolk that restricts our freedom " in some cases also sustains and nourishes, true? The yoke only restricts... a Freudian slip? I suppose you could maintain it was infertile. :blink: I know you know english better than I do so couldn't resist :lol:

[hrothgar]

you are making, not for the first time, a logical fallacy (actually several)... whether or not i believe that noah's ark occurred in the way the bible describes it, and for the reasons given in the bible, has absolutely no bearing on my reasoning abilities or my opinions of other matters

 

for example, the fact that you believe co2 to be causing global warming has no bearing on anything else you might believe or reaons, regardless of the ridiculousness of the co2 argument

Here's the thing Jimmy... the facts don't support you on this one.

 

I can point to any number of studies that show an extremely strong correlation between religious observance and conservative ideology.

 

If I know your religious beliefs and behaviors, I can predict your political affiliation with great degree of accuracy. I can can also (accurately) predict what you believe about a wide variety of other issues.

 

For example: You introduced the topic global warming. Here's a lovely little piece by the Pew Research center that illustrates just what I'm talking about:

 

http://people-press.org/report/417/a-deepe...-global-warming

 

You may claim that you're bucking the trend on global warming. In fact, you're just running with the rest of the evangelical herd...

 

I'm just HIGHLY amused that you're dumb enough to chose this as an example of your highly developed capability for independent logical thought.

 

Note: I readily admit that nothing in life is perfect.

Most any model has outliers.

 

I know that there are deeply religious Southern Baptists who none-the-less believe in anthropomorphic global warming.

 

However, examples like this are called outliers for a reason

[TimG]

I wonder if your bridge clients know that you (subtlety) mock/deprecate their performance on these forums?

Subtly?

[Phil]

This thread kind of reminds me of him.

I'd argue that there is a fundamental difference between confronting people openly and in their face and holding private little bitch sessions behind their back.

Private little bitch sessions?

 

Nah, my grandfather would take on anyone anywhere. If he were born 30 years later, he'd be an active blogger. He'd love things like the WC. Imagine how he would feel when he would he'd go out and see a rich black person. Boy this would make his blood boil. Get home and start pounding away on the keyboard about how much he hated dem niggahs.

 

The problem is that people like him (and you) completely forget that there is a completely different world view than the one he (and you) espouse. He (and you) are totally blinded by a sense of self-righteousness, but its really just deep seeded-hatred. How many christians (or frankly, any religious people) read BBF daily? How many get sickened by your rants? Do you know? Do you even care?

 

You hate religious people. It isn't enough for you to simply ignore them and chuckle with your like-minded buddies about how you view religion. These 'private little bitch sessions' (which you seem OK with) would be like my grandfather and his John Birch buds drinking a bud at the Tavern with the nightly topic being blacks and jews, especially after they've had one too many. Sure, what harm does it do? Just a couple of good old boys tippin' back a few shooting the breeze. All good fun, right?

 

The problem is the next day when a black applies at my grandfather's aircraft maintenance facililty who gets turned down for a job. Or Mr. Cohen who applies at that bank for a business loan who gets turned down because of poor references.

 

I wonder what your 'private little bitch sessions' consist of. Maybe its chardonnay or pinot noir (or reefer :blink: ) instead of Bud. Maybe its an art gallery or an alumni gathering or (gasp) a bridge club. The topic might be start out as Sarah Palin but can easily decay into jokes about the virgin mary.

 

And the next day, I'm quite sure there are manifestations. Perhaps your prof buddy reads a term paper about abortion in the Political Ethics he's teaching. Now matter how well written, he just can't find a way to give this idiot an A, because, well, he's an idiot.

 

Rascism is rascism. Intolerance is intolerance. You have no right to call anyone 'cracker' or a 'git', nor call them stupid or ignorant. You are no different than my grandfather or that bank manager.

 

If someone starts a thread about ID, then go ahead, flame away. Be my guest.

 

You started this thread about Noah's Ark. It is no different any street bully going out and picking a fight with someone of a different color.

[hrothgar]

Nah, my grandfather would take on anyone anywhere. If he were born 30 years later, he'd be an active blogger. He'd love things like the WC. Imagine how he would feel when he would he'd go out and see a rich black person. Boy this would make his blood boil. Get home and start pounding away on the keyboard about how much he hated dem niggahs.

 

The problem is that people like him (and you) completely forget that there is a completely different world view than the one he (and you) espouse. He (and you) are totally blinded by a sense of self-righteousness, but its really just deep seeded-hatred. How many christians (or frankly, any religious people) read BBF daily? How many get sickened by your rants? Do you know? Do you even care?

 

You hate religious people. It isn't enough for you to simply ignore them and chuckle with your like-minded buddies about how you view religion. These 'private little bitch sessions' (which you seem OK with) would be like my grandfather and his John Birch buds drinking a bud at the Tavern with the nightly topic being blacks and jews, especially after they've had one too many. Sure, what harm does it do? Just a couple of good old boys tippin' back a few shooting the breeze. All good fun, right?

 

The problem is the next day when a black applies at my grandfather's aircraft maintenance facililty who gets turned down for a job. Or Mr. Cohen who applies at that bank for a business loan who gets turned down because of poor references.

 

I wonder what your 'private little bitch sessions' consist of. Maybe its chardonnay or pinot noir (or reefer  ;) ) instead of Bud. Maybe its an art gallery or an alumni gathering or (gasp) a bridge club. The topic might be start out as Sarah Palin but can easily decay into jokes about the virgin mary.

 

And the next day, I'm quite sure there are manifestations. Perhaps your prof buddy reads a term paper in the Political Ethics he's teaching about abortion. Now matter how well written, he just can't find a way to give this idiot an A, because, well, he's an idiot.

 

Rascism is rascism. Intolerance is intolerance. You have no right to call anyone 'cracker' or a 'git', nor call them stupid or ignorant. You are no different than my grandfather or that bank manager.

 

If someone starts a thread about ID, then go ahead, flame away. Be my guest.

 

You started this thread about Noah's Ark. It is no different any street bully going out and picking a fight with someone of a different color.

 

In my postings, I try fairly hard to differentiate between fundamentalists and "religion" in general.

 

I readily admit, I find religion kind of silly. I wish that we, as a society, were able to outgrow it. (Religion strikes me as more trouble than its worth) However, I certainly don't feel that I have a visceral hatred for it.

 

I'd also ask whether or not you can point to many threads where I go out of my way to bash Buddhists, Sufis, Unitarians, Quakers, you name it.

 

There are (obviously) any number of threads where I bash fundamentalists of one stripe or another. I'm pretty ecumenical about this... I can point to threads where I express my contempt for

 

Fundamentalist Christians

Fundamentalist Muslims

Fundamentalist Jews

Fundamentalists Hindus

Fundamentalist Mormons

Scientologists (in general)

I might have even pissed on Shinto's at one point or another (hard to recall)

 

I make no bones about my beliefs on this topic. I consider religious fundamentalists down right dangerous. I don't have much use for libertarians, conservatives, and the like.

 

I have written off friends because of their political beliefs. It was just too frustrating to be around them.

 

In a similar vein, I refuse to do business with companies that give disproportionate political donations to Republicans or Conservative cause or practice what consider to be poor labor policies. (Walmart, Dominos, Home Depot, ... It's a pretty long list)

 

Moreover, I agree: In the abstract, my behavior is no difference from that of your grandfather and the bank manager. The main differences are

 

1. I'm a private citizen. I have considerably more flexibility in my actions than does a bank manager. Case in point, a few years back, I pulled all my money out of Bank of America. Two days later, folks from the Bank called me up and asked me when I wasn't doing business with them any more. I get to go and say "I don't do business with companies that donate lots of money to Republicans. If the corporation changes its behavior, I might consider doing business with all y'all once again". In contrast, I don't think that the Bank Manager gets to tell Mr Cohen "I'm not doing business with you because you're a Jew"

 

2. I am VERY open about my opinions. Hard to spend much time around me and not know what I think about these issues. (Indeed, as I recall the one of your key critiques is that I am too open about these sorts of things... I'm making the poor oppressed Christians feel unwelcome... Someone might feed them to the lions)

 

3. The specific groups that I target

 

My "defense", such that it is, is to point out that there is a nasty little political war going on in this country. Religious fundamentalists decided that they wanted to enter the fray and try to shove their convictions down my throat, screw up the school systems that my friends and family attend, and piss all over my air and water.

 

The "foot soldiers" of the lunatic fringe of the Republican party don't get to go and complain that folks treat them differently...

 

Blowback's a bitch.

[luke warm]

you are making, not for the first time, a logical fallacy (actually several)... whether or not i believe that noah's ark occurred in the way the bible describes it, and for the reasons given in the bible, has absolutely no bearing on my reasoning abilities or my opinions of other matters

 

for example, the fact that you believe co2 to be causing global warming has no bearing on anything else you might believe or reaons, regardless of the ridiculousness of the co2 argument

I'm just HIGHLY amused that you're dumb enough to chose this as an example of your highly developed capability for independent logical thought.

i left my quote up so that it is clear what i said and that you continue your fallacious manner of argumentation... this time you use a red herring to set up a straw man argument... that you have the arrogance to call anyone else dumb is a mystery

[Winstonm]

there is a nasty little political war going on in this country....The "foot soldiers" of the lunatic fringe of the Republican party....

 

I find it stunning that there are those who do not recognize or acknowledge this "political war", which is glaringly obvious to me. I also find it odd that those whom Richard describes as "Republican party foot solders" are led by ideological zealots who hold them in total disdain and only condone the foot soldiers' own beliefs in order to appear allied and thus their appararent belief system is nothing more than a method of control.

 

I suggest it important to understand how Leo Strauss influenced the modern neoconservative movement and exactly how the neoconservative processes work to defend an ideology in the face of conflicting evidence.

[helene_t]

Hanif Kureishi says in an interview: [after you die] you dissolve into the minds of others, and you haunt them until they are tired of you, and even after.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7895604.stm

[helene_t]

One of these days, I will learn to stop typing after making (or thinking I have made) my main point..

I don't think you will :(

[PassedOut]

there is a nasty little political war going on in this country....The "foot soldiers" of the lunatic fringe of the Republican party....

 

I find it stunning that there are those who do not recognize or acknowledge this "political war", which is glaringly obvious to me. I also find it odd that those whom Richard describes as "Republican party foot solders" are led by ideological zealots who hold them in total disdain and only condone the foot soldiers' own beliefs in order to appear allied and thus their appararent belief system is nothing more than a method of control.

 

I suggest it important to understand how Leo Strauss influenced the modern neoconservative movement and exactly how the neoconservative processes work to defend an ideology in the face of conflicting evidence.

It's fine that people get great comfort from accepting religious myths like Noah's ark, virgin births, resurrections from the dead, the golden fleece, and so on, as real. But it's not fine for people to impose their religious beliefs on others through law.

 

Yes, there truly is a political war being waged in the US, and the republicans do indeed use the ignorant and superstitious as footsoldiers in that war. The object of the political war is to increase the disparity between the rich and poor by weakening and marginalizing the middle class. The republican footsoldiers are simply dupes.

 

It seems that you consider the Obama administration indistinguishable in many ways from the one it replaced. I expect Obama to defend the US against the republicans in this political war. Are you skeptical about that too?

[jdonn]

there is a nasty little political war going on in this country....The "foot soldiers" of the lunatic fringe of the Republican party....

 

I find it stunning that there are those who do not recognize or acknowledge this "political war", which is glaringly obvious to me. I also find it odd that those whom Richard describes as "Republican party foot solders" are led by ideological zealots who hold them in total disdain and only condone the foot soldiers' own beliefs in order to appear allied and thus their appararent belief system is nothing more than a method of control.

 

I suggest it important to understand how Leo Strauss influenced the modern neoconservative movement and exactly how the neoconservative processes work to defend an ideology in the face of conflicting evidence.

It's fine that people get great comfort from accepting religious myths like Noah's ark, virgin births, resurrections from the dead, the golden fleece, and so on, as real. But it's not fine for people to impose their religious beliefs on others through law.

 

Yes, there truly is a political war being waged in the US, and the republicans do indeed use the ignorant and superstitious as footsoldiers in that war. The object of the political war is to increase the disparity between the rich and poor by weakening and marginalizing the middle class. The republican footsoldiers are simply dupes.

 

It seems that you consider the Obama administration indistinguishable in many ways from the one it replaced. I expect Obama to defend the US against the republicans in this political war. Are you skeptical about that too?

Isn't it astounding that Republicans accuse Obama of starting some sort of class-war by wanting to raise taxes on "rich" people?

[Lobowolf]

But it's not fine for people to impose their religious beliefs on others through law.

I think it depends what you mean by "beliefs." Certainly, beliefs themselves shouldn't be imposed on people; but laws based on those beliefs are a different thing. Laws are based on people's moral ideals. I don't see a substantive difference between murder's being illegal because atheists and/or agnostics thinking it's "wrong" (or "undesirable" on a utilitarian basis), and its being legal because Christians believe it's wrong because of the Biblical commandment. We vote our morality, whether it's from the Bible, a philosophical text, or just the Golden Rule. The source of one's moral beliefs doesn't disqualify him or her from political participation.

[TimG]

But it's not fine for people to impose their religious beliefs on others through law.

I think it depends what you mean by "beliefs." Certainly, beliefs themselves shouldn't be imposed on people; but laws based on those beliefs are a different thing. Laws are based on people's moral ideals. I don't see a substantive difference between murder's being illegal because atheists and/or agnostics thinking it's "wrong" (or "undesirable" on a utilitarian basis), and its being legal because Christians believe it's wrong because of the Biblical commandment. We vote our morality, whether it's from the Bible, a philosophical text, or just the Golden Rule. The source of one's moral beliefs doesn't disqualify him or her from political participation.

If a majority of Americans believed that working on the Sabbath was immoral, you'd be OK with laws that make it illegal to work on Sundays?