BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Apr 09 - 12:04 AM

O-o-o-h yeah, it does....sorry....if you are away from your computer, for a while, I'd let it load....methinks you may like it....a who-o-o-o-ole lot!...and I don't particularly like religious songs at all! But this, is a little different. May even become amongst your favorite! the other one is great too...a breath of fresh air!...and not puerile!! GfS

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Slag
Date: 04 Apr 09 - 11:57 PM

re "Christ In Me(the Deer's Cry)" begins with Matthew 28:20b "...lo, I am with you alway(s), even (un)to the end of the age ( "world", KJV although "age" or "ages" is the proper Greek translation). The video response was without any written text as far as I went.

I have been around plenty of deer and have never heard a deer cry. At best they will occasionally bleat of huff and a buck in rut will snort but they are rather mute animals on this continent.

With regards to all the foregoing and in an attempt to turn this back to the topic at hand, mis-defining or redefining terms so as to create a secret language (a form of isolating victims) is a fraud that can lead to the delusion of the targeted victim. Misdirection, a little equivocation, a little skewing and those who do not know or understand logic or the power of language (never mind the rhetoric) become trapped in a form of applied external insanity. They do not have the wherewithal to resist. Add social and familial pressure and the uneducated, the innocent children and all caught in the drag lines may fall victim to the delusion. Maybe I can raise (once again, sigh) the spectre of Adolf. He addressed real problems. He appealed to pride of race and nation. He championed release from the international humiliation which had been foisted upon Germany.

It is the leader's duty to define REALITY and then deal with it. If the reality is not clearly defined or intentionally twisted then the path is toward destruction.

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 Apr 09 - 06:50 PM

No problem. Perhaps when you get around a faster system. By the way, I didn't recall any scripture in either song.
Regards,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Slag
Date: 04 Apr 09 - 05:09 PM

Gfs, Yes, all of about 12 seconds of the first. One: I'm not "joining" You Tube to download the thing. Two: with dial up you wait 20 to 30 seconds to hear one to two seconds of the song at a time. Tedious doesn't begin to describe the process. Three: I don't really have the financial luxury of getting Hughes net or some other gradated wireless provider at this time. Four, she seems to have a lovely voice and I recognize the scripture. five: I just don't have the time or the patience to hear it piecemeal...but I get your point and understand what you are saying and for that I thank you. Sorry if I sound a little cranky. I probably am.

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: Janie
Date: 04 Apr 09 - 04:59 PM

Oops. Left out 1. a disclaimer that I have not carefully read the thread, but have skimmed it, noticing when it approaches the "brink" of not listening to each other, only to observe people pull back, and 2. based on that skimming, the observation that this thread, while lengthy, is remarkable in the over-all acceptance and civility of the discussion. Perhaps because it does not too much delve into the religious belief systems of individual posters.

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: Janie
Date: 04 Apr 09 - 04:50 PM

Something to reflect upon. Any thread here on Mudcat regarding religion becomes lengthy, and usually passionate - regardless of whether one is "fer" or "agin." So many so sure they are right and the other is wrong. Some tolerate differing perspectives, but few accept different perspectives.

And yet people (both "fer" and "agin") express surprise and dismay at the amount of violence in the world done in the name of -or against - religion.

Fertile ground for understanding the self, and then, perhaps, understanding others. What plays out here is a microcosm of what gets played out in the 3-D world. There is a difference in degree, but that is all.

This not a critisism. After-all, our community is a microcosm of society. At least of Western society.

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 Apr 09 - 02:19 PM

Great post, Amos......Besides, you were quoting another writer.......(wink)

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: Amos
Date: 04 Apr 09 - 02:02 PM

"Mr. Brownlow: The law assumes that your wife acts under your direction.
Mr. Bumble: If the law supposes that, then the law is a ass, a idiot! If that's the eye of the law, then the law is a bachelor. And the worst I wish the law is that his eye may be opened by experience. "

Oliver Twist (by DIckens, obviously)

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 Apr 09 - 01:58 PM

Well, on here..you never know!!!

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Apr 09 - 01:53 PM

Be it noted that it wasn't Charles Dickens who said "The law is a ass," it was Mr. Bumble, one of Dickens' fictional characters.

So I guess it was REALY Bilbo who said "The road goes ever on"; Peter Parker who said "My spidy senses are tingling" and Jabba the Hut that said "Your Jedi mind tricks will not work on me".

Blimey just what DO we pay these writers for???

Exactly who was it that said "Some people don't half talk bollocks", then?

:D (eG)

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: Amos
Date: 04 Apr 09 - 01:39 PM

Oh, surely I meant Paul Anka, or possibly the Beatle...



A

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 Apr 09 - 12:50 PM

Which Paul?

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: Amos
Date: 04 Apr 09 - 12:14 PM

I didn't skip over the apology, if that was addressed to me--I was just commenting on topic for once.

Thank you for referencing Obama. It beats hanging your hat on Paul by a country mile.


A

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 Apr 09 - 11:31 AM

Hey Slag, Did you ever get to watch those yet??

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 Apr 09 - 08:10 PM

Hey, what did you do??...Skip over the apology??..and what is the 'paranoia' stuff?..Perhaps YOU ARE delusional..or maybe Obama was correct, in Europe, apologizing for the 'American arrogance'.
Hey Amos, I actually 'reference Obama..You should be proud of me...unless that's arrogance is a part of pride....Yikes, can't escape!!!
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: Amos
Date: 03 Apr 09 - 06:30 PM

IT is really islly -- in my humble opinion -- to try and make an argument that something as remote from the commons of experience as religion can be called "real" in the normal sense; the term hinges on agreements about what is, and the reported territory is uniformly described as being beyond the sphere of common agreement. That's why it is a totally useless platform for a social strucxture, obviously--it is not of the world.

But that does not mean that a religious proposition is a delusion in the sense of an insane perception, merely that it is an "Other" perception.

It is problematical to differentiate between such perceptions and the kind of plastic self-hypnosis that people resort to under stress, though. That's why the whole subject is seen as so "iffy" by some folks.



A

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Slag
Date: 03 Apr 09 - 06:21 PM

No, it's more like "if the suit fits..." case.

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: John P
Date: 03 Apr 09 - 05:44 PM

Now John, was that Nessus-airy?

Hee hee. Sorry, probably not. I remain, however, astonished by the imagination that produced that post from this thread, and I found the "let the shoe fit" part offensive, since there's no evidence of that particular shoe fitting on anyone here.

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: Bill D
Date: 03 Apr 09 - 05:03 PM

Nessus lives!

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Slag
Date: 03 Apr 09 - 04:43 PM

Now John, was that Nessus-airy?

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: John P
Date: 03 Apr 09 - 03:53 PM

If I was in error, then pardon me. From the context of the posts, I thought one of you,(and I don't remember which one), was supplanting the name of Jesus, with the name Nessus. Again, if that was in error, then the assumption was wrong....but if not, let the shoe fit. It just seems that in posts past, when someone references the name of Jesus, whether pro Christian, in their political 'inclinations', or not, those whose anti-Christian political, bents, start jumping all over him/her.

Guest from Sanity, would you consider changing your name to Guest from Paranoia?

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: Amos
Date: 03 Apr 09 - 01:06 PM

From Wikipedia:

"Nessus is a male (of the second type, his species has three sexes) character in Larry Niven's Known Space universe, of the species Pierson's Puppeteer, a herbivorous species noted for two heads whose mouths act as capable hands. Pierson's Puppeteers are technically advanced in most of the physical sciences.

Nessus, like all Puppeteers ever met by humans, is insane by Puppeteer standards. Those who are sane are far too sensible (read "cowardly") to go off-world or interact with non-Puppeteers. Nessus demonstrates traits that in humans would be diagnosed as schizophrenia, manic-depressive disorder, displacement, and at times, extreme suggestibility.

Nessus is featured in the short story "The Soft Weapon" (printed in the 1968 collection Neutron Star) and is also one of the expeditionaries to the Ringworld in the 1970 book of the same name. Nessus is a central character in the novels Fleet of Worlds and Juggler of Worlds, set almost 200 years before Ringworld."

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: Mrrzy
Date: 03 Apr 09 - 12:15 PM

I'm still barefoot. I brought up Nessus because he's the best example I could think of for culture determining sanity. Nessus, remember, WAS insane, it wasn't just that he thought he was.

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Slag
Date: 03 Apr 09 - 12:51 AM

Not yet gfs. I have dial-up as I live in a remote location and it is slow as (?). But I will give it a try when I have a chance.

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 06:33 PM

If I was in error, then pardon me. From the context of the posts, I thought one of you,(and I don't remember which one), was supplanting the name of Jesus, with the name Nessus. Again, if that was in error, then the assumption was wrong....but if not, let the shoe fit. It just seems that in posts past, when someone references the name of Jesus, whether pro Christian, in their political 'inclinations', or not, those whose anti-Christian political, bents, start jumping all over him/her. If this was not the case, ok...but I thought it incumbent upon me to clarify.
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: Bill D
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 06:31 PM

Nessus is 'insane' because he is NOT an abject coward. The rest of his race err WAY over on the side of caution.

crazy, ain't it?

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: John P
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 06:19 PM

Guest from Sanity, I'm not sure what you're talking about. I haven't objected to anyone referencing anyone. Mrzzy made a reference to a character in a novel called Nessus and then asked if anyone recognized the reference. I did. The only other Nessus I know of is a centaur from Greek mythology who killed Hercules, probably the source for the name in the novel. If it's important, can you elucidate?

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity...
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 06:14 PM

..Oh yeah,....100!

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 06:13 PM

Hey Slag,..Did you listen to the vids?

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Slag
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 05:59 PM

MMMMmmmmWaaaah!

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 02:45 PM

Aw, such a pity...no checks, no chicks....Hey, Art, I just gave you a line!...(wink)

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: Amos
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 02:44 PM

You're "chic" is dated, Art, but your art is still chic.

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: Art Thieme
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 02:36 PM

I just date chicks!

(These days I've no checks to date...)

Art

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 01:39 PM

Amos, Thanks for straightening out the links for me. My thing at this end was having a problem doing it...though, it has in the past.

Mrrzy, and JohnP, In posts past, depending on the subject being discussed, I've 'referenced', Adlai Stevenson, Shakespeare, Mark Twain, Frank Zappa, Vladimir Lenin, Bob Dylan, Robert Hienlien, among others. That being said, I find it,...umm, ..shall we say, 'curious' that you should take exception to me referencing 'Nessus'...in a thread regarding religion. Perhaps you, are the one 'delusional' in a phobic sort of way? Take it easy....unless you feel it more appropriate, that in this thread, I should be 'referencing' Barney Frank, Pelosi, Timmy Tax Cheat, Chris Dodd, or Rush Limbaugh. Whether you like it or not, 'Nessus' as you prefer to call him(phobic?), is considered by most historians, as the most influential religious figure, in history. Why not reference him?? You reference him every time you date a check!
Puzzled Regards,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: John P
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 12:04 PM

I certainly recognized the Nessus reference. One of my favorite literary characters. An interesting example of an individual from one culture acting like people from another culture, and therefor being considered insane by his own culture. Of course, he considered himself insane as well.

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: Amos
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 11:29 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iiXM5X34B0Q (The Deer's Cry)

www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfO6JpR5Ip8 (The Voice)

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: Mrrzy
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 11:15 AM

Anybody recognize the Nessus reference?

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 03:37 AM

Slag, and/or Amos, Here's the other. I think Amos saw this one, and enjoyed it.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfO6JpR5Ip8

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 03:34 AM

Slag, Once in a while, I post a link, that I think certain people would enjoy, (even Amos, has liked them...so I cut him slack...wink!).So here is one for you
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iiXM5X34B0Q
I tried getting two, performed by the same group, but every time I come back here, the reply box is empty..so here is just one. I'll post the other, sometime later. Enjoy!
Warmest Regards,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: Amos
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 03:25 AM

There is such a thing as sanity. It is not just opinions. My remark about the election was an example of a large mass of people agreeing on something that they got wrong, somehow. History is fill of mass agreements not closely tied to reality.

A

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 01:40 AM

Amos, In your context that would be an adjective, and as an opinion, but not used in a legal or professional capacity. Just how one side or the other would describe how they 'felt' about the turnout.

Hey, I'm still giving Obama the credit of the doubt.....so easy...but I'm a'watchin' 'em....still he has not gained back any trust....just watchin'..!

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: Amos
Date: 01 Apr 09 - 10:45 PM

The majority is always sane, as Nessus, the mad-because-brave Puppeteer pointed out. Sanity is a legal term.

It is also a technical term describing mental and spiritual states. In that context, the majority is NOT always sane; witness the 2004 election.

In that context there are a lot more important criteria than mass agreement.

A

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Slag
Date: 01 Apr 09 - 09:51 PM

Without question, Guest from Sanity! I wish you had membership so i could pm you as we are getting quite far afield. However, all in John: 6:63, 8:47, 10:27-28, 12:48, all of chapter 14 with emphasis on 16-18 as you noted, 15:16 and 17, 17:14-17.

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 01 Apr 09 - 07:32 PM

Ah, Slag...in the context of your reply,, you mentioned 'Being born again'...ok, then understanding John14:15-20 should be a snap!....wink!

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Slag
Date: 01 Apr 09 - 07:27 PM

Guest from sanity! Your absolute distillation of the essence of Christ's conditions for inclusion into The Kingdom leave me a little dubious of you knowledge of Christian theology. What about "Ye must be born again!"? Or "Not everyone that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven... . Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And I will say to them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

In all fairness to you though, you have enunciated what is commonly called the law of the believers. I would only argue that it is a condition of the saved and not a saving act. The saving act was Christ's alone (see Ephesians 2:8-10).

Yes LH, 50 lashes with a Bible place marker. If you're going to resist proselytizing (or ...'ising, if you're a Brit) ya gotta know how to spell it. It kinda funny, ironic, that I am not much of a joiner either. My sales resistance is second to none. I prefer logic where logic is called for, am an avid fan of the sciences and I try to be an independent thinker. And as such I argue with the religious communities as much as I do with the non religious. Well, it keeps life interesting.

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 01 Apr 09 - 05:00 PM

Little Hawk, Hello, once again!... 'proselytizers' is the correct spelling.

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 01 Apr 09 - 04:27 PM

Dawkins "The God Delusion" covers this idea well. People can be deluded without being
crazy. Religion constitutes a labeling. I don't think that labels define people very well.
I consider what people do over what people believe.

Interesting stat: Top group in US, Catholics. Second, Baptists. Third group, "Nones"
meaning none of the above. Secular. These were determined by recent polls.

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Apr 09 - 04:13 PM

All human beings naturally pass on their multitude of beliefs (religious, political, scientific, educational, and social beliefs of every kind) to their children.

It happens automatically, whether or not the parents give their active attention to the matter, because children tend to imitate and take for granted whatever they see happening around them in their early formative years. (and they often rebell against much of it later, in their adolescent years)

If you want to try to play God and do something about that in a legislative sense and step between parents and their children, all I can say (sarcastically) is..."Good luck!" (and I hope you do not succeed in messing with too many other people's lives in the process)

One's exquisite judgements about what is right and wrong and best in every single sense and situation in life are best applied to oneself, not aggressively foisted upon others.

So what I'm saying is:

Religious proseletyzers...leave me and others alone.
Anti-religious proseletyzers...leave me and others alone.
Government and political proseletyzers...leave me and others alone.
Medical and marketing proseletyzers of all kinds...leave me and others alone.

And if I have mispelled the word proseletyzers...forgive me my imperfections.

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: John P
Date: 01 Apr 09 - 03:03 PM

People also have the right to believe as they wish, String. It is only when they try to foist that belief on others who are, for one reason or another, unqualified to make an informed choice that they become a problem. - Don T

Does this include teaching their children their religious beliefs?

I think recent events have shown all of us to suffer from mass delusion - i.e we have all believed in the financial system up to now. - Nickhere

There isn't much real comparison between "believing" in our financial system and believing in a god. Our financial system exists and we can all verify that. I, for one, have never believed in its functionality. In fact, I was sure that this day would come as soon as Reagan and the Republicans started deregulating.

A shocking number horrible crimes are committed by people of with no particular religious affiliation - M Ted

Yes. So? Do you think anyone is saying differently?

We cannot exist without assumptions. Every time you get behind the wheel of your car you have to assume to some degree that the other drivers are going to obey the rules of the road - Slag

Again, there is a huge difference between assuming that most of the people around you are sane and believing in a god. The two aren't even in the same ballpark. Besides, I assume that all the other drivers on the road are poised to kill me and I drive accordingly. Comparing making assumptions with having a belief is like comparing apples to fish.

I believe in the existence of Hong Kong, even though I've never seen it. But then, there is evidence for the existence of Hong Kong. Please don't try to make the word "belief" mean the same thing in two very different circumstances.

Subject: RE: BS: It's not delusional if it's religious?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 01 Apr 09 - 02:48 PM

Hey, I just thought of something.....What IF the baby was resurrected, came back to life, only to suffocate in the suitcase???? Its still child endangerment!!!!!