 sj |
||
|
||
BS: An Easter Question
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: punkfolkrocker Date: 01 Apr 16 - 01:41 PM ok, about heaven.. when married folks cherish the belief of meeting up and being together again for all eternity... what arrangements does heaven make for people who were happily married to 2 or 3 or more spouses...??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Dave the Gnome Date: 01 Apr 16 - 01:56 PM There is plenty of evidence for religion, Keith. No way, even in the widest dreams of a lifelong acid freak after a night out on mescal, can that be interpreted as there is plenty of evidence to support religion. Sorry Steve. The language they speak in Hertford is not only different to the rest of the UK, it is not of this world. How do you cope with your in-laws? ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Senoufou Date: 01 Apr 16 - 02:35 PM Punkfolkrocker, as I understand it, when one dies, one doesn't whizz up to heaven and start living a life of Riley. Apparently, one stays asleep, in an intermediate state. Only when Christ comes again will all the dead rise up and start to live. Loads of folk aren't aware of this doctrine, and imagine one is reunited immediately with loved ones etc. So all those sad little bunches of flowers and cards saying 'She is now an angel in heaven' or 'Reunited with Fred' and so on are, theologically speaking, far off the mark. I'll have a long wait for my endless supplies of crumpets and ale, and my husband won't get his hands on the 57 virgins quite as fast as he thinks! I do hope God/Jesus will know what to do with all the small heaps of cremated ashes scattered about numerous Gardens of Remembrance. I shan't want to be resurrected as a rather fetching pile of dust... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Dave the Gnome Date: 01 Apr 16 - 02:41 PM I don't think that is most folks understanding, Eliza. In the bible stories themselves both Jesus and his mother ascended into heaven without a second coming. If Jesus came to earth as god's son to be like a human then surely what applies to him must apply to the rest of us. Having been brought up in the Russian orthodox and then Catholic faiths I am pretty sure that the reunited and looking down on us myths were and still are very much perpetuated by the established churches. Cheers Dave |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Dave the Gnome Date: 01 Apr 16 - 02:42 PM Maybe our resident theological expert, Joe, can enlighten us as to what is currently taught? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Raggytash Date: 01 Apr 16 - 03:50 PM Strange the way religion moves the goal posts at regular intervals. When I married I made a commitment for life as far as I was concerned, a product of my upbringing some would say. I was taught that when my spouse died we would be reunited in heaven. Now here I have a problem. If I shuffle off this mortal coil before my good lady and she were to remarry after my demise then, in the every after, would she then reside with her new husband or with me. Presuming she remarried for love it would be reasonable for her to expect to be with her second husband when they popped their clogs leaving me, her first husband, out in the cold. Puzzled, that's me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Senoufou Date: 01 Apr 16 - 04:29 PM Raggytash, I seem to recall that in the Bible, Jesus was asked that very question. It was put to him that if a woman had a series of marriages, each leaving her a widow, what should she do on arriving in heaven and having several men claiming her? He replied along the lines that in heaven there's no such thing as men or women, and no marriage. I take this to mean it's a different dimension altogether, and human parameters don't apply. Regarding our own resurrection, I have an idea we have to wait for the Second Coming (unspecified time) whereupon we'll be given new bodies and join God in heaven. Meanwhile we're in an intermediary holding position, until he arrives once more. I just don't know what to think about all this. My atheist friend says, "Look mate, when yer dead yer dead!" In fact, as my father used to say, nobody knows, nobody can say, so you just have to get on with your life as best you can. I've had many delightful cats over the years, that I loved very much. I do hope they can be resurrected too. Maybe at the Second Coming, they'll materialise in front of me. Trouble is, most of them had bad habits. I reckon the angels wouldn't relish a pack of Siamese cats weeing on their harps. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Steve Shaw Date: 01 Apr 16 - 05:07 PM "He replied along the lines that in heaven there's no such thing as men or women" Oi, bugger that then! And I'll bet that punkfolkrocker's with me there! "I've had many delightful cats over the years, that I loved very much." Me too. There's a little place in our garden where five of our cats lie under the sod (we've lived here for nearly thirty years now). There's a slate slab just behind on which I always put some pots planted up with flowers, along with a little statue of Tom Kitten. If and when we ever leave this house (never, I hope), I'll cut a piece of turf from their patch to transplant into our new garden. Even atheists can be sentimental old fools! :-( Actually, I know a place where pets can be buried in an official pets' cemetery. That's fine. Except for the crucifixes on their graves. Aargh! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: punkfolkrocker Date: 01 Apr 16 - 06:46 PM What.. an eternity without women... ?????!!!!!!!!!! .. though being a realist.. if I've been up there for a few millennia it might be nice to have the occasional century of peace and quiet, not getting nagged for leaving boxes of music gear and cables out on the heavenly clouds... My old mum has the ashes of two cats and my sister under a little coffee table in the kitchen. It's a mini shrine decorated with photos and cheap plastic trinkets. One of the cats has a better quality, more expensive urn than my sister... I wouldn't be too comfortable under that table with them.... At least my parents, even though mum was an undereducated menial worker, and dad a factory machine operator wage slave after his demob from national service, were young post war political progressives, refusing to have their kids christened on principle. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Joe Offer Date: 01 Apr 16 - 07:04 PM Current Catholic teaching is that some go straight to heaven. Some with unresolved issues are in a state of "preparation and purification" called purgatory. The Catechism says that some think of purgatory as flames and punishment, but that there is no reason to insist that it's flames and punishment. My view is that purgatory is kind of like Mitch Alkbom's The Five People You Meet in Heaven - you meet people or relive experiences to resolve the unresolved issues in your life. I've read very credible Catholic authors who think that there will be very few people in hell. In the past, Catholics were strongly influenced by Dante's Inferno and Purgatorio. Current teaching is much more vague that it once was. I think that's a sign of growth. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Senoufou Date: 02 Apr 16 - 02:58 AM It's comforting to know that others have dearly loved their cats too. I've wept absolute buckets on losing a cat. I must have had about thirty of the little blighters over a long life. (I generally have three or four at a time) The Bible doesn't say anything about animals going to heaven. I shan't stay there long if they aren't welcome. I'd miss all the wildlife as well. Hope the fallow deer, pheasants and foxes I've befriended will be there too. My husband has lost numerous relatives to terrible diseases and suffering in Africa. He often speaks hopefully about seeing them again. But I suppose I'm trying to recreate Earth in heaven, and it isn't feasible. My atheist pal is elderly too, and she just grins and says, "Well, sunshine, see yer there eh? But I don't hold out much hope!" That's interesting Joe. I used to have a cup of tea quite often with some RC nuns. (IBVM) Really nice women and very happy to elucidate doctrine for me. They explained Purgatory, and that only 'saints' went directly to heaven. But not their bodies, just their souls. I met them (the nuns, not the saints) while Prison Visiting, as they did cooking with the inmates. They always invited me to pop round to their little house which served as a convent. I also made retreats with the All Hallows (C of E) nuns (CAH) at Ditchingham in Norfolk. I actually really like nuns (most of them) as they 'walk the talk' so to speak. If I rabbit on any more, this 'Easter' thread will end up edging into Christmas! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 02 Apr 16 - 03:21 AM Dave, When I said there is no evidence for religion, only an utter fool would assume I meant evidence that religion exists. As a church member I am such evidence myself. No-one needs evidence that religion exists. We have all seen churches! You are just pretending to believe that to save Steve's face. Religions are founded on belief in supernatural entities, for which there is no hard evidence, was my obvious meaning. You are just playing silly games and spoiling a serious discussion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: akenaton Date: 02 Apr 16 - 04:17 AM "You are just playing silly games and spoiling a serious discussion". I believe in reincarnation,1.e. vis a vis Dave, Steve and Raggytash. .....but who were they in their previous form? :0) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Raggytash Date: 02 Apr 16 - 04:24 AM I would have thought you had a ready answer to that Akhenaton We were all obviously Satan. That is, of course, if you believe in Satan. Yet another fairy tale to me though. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Jim Carroll Date: 02 Apr 16 - 04:43 AM "I believe in reincarnation,1.e. vis a vis Dave, Steve and Raggytash." It seems some people's interest in this thread is beginning to flag. Give it a rest lads - you know what will happen if you don't Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Dave the Gnome Date: 02 Apr 16 - 04:45 AM What are you on about, ake. I have never been anyone else. Never will be. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Steve Shaw Date: 02 Apr 16 - 05:20 AM "As a church member I am such evidence myself." Not necessarily. It isn't evidence just because you say it is. For all we know, you could be a rabid atheist who sits in the Sunday pew conjuring up the plot of your next novel. Rather, by thy fruits shall we know thee. :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Steve Shaw Date: 02 Apr 16 - 08:01 AM I've always found the concepts of afterlife and reincarnation very intriguing, even though I ultimately dismiss both ideas out of hand. Just think of the hundreds-of-trillions-to-one chance of your existing at all. Your father produced hundreds of millions of sperms every day - every day - and your mother had tens of thousands of eggs at the ready. If that wasn't enough, multiply that by their parents, then by their parents....go right back to the dawn of life. Yet you're here. You made it. The chance of you being you was vanishingly infinitesimal. Yet here you are. You're a winner. And if you're reading this on an expensive computer in a wealthy western country, and you have reasonable health and a good life with family or friends, there's plenty of icing on your cake, even though not everything will be perfect. So what do we do? Why, that isn't enough. We want more! We want another life after this one! We can't believe that we've already had more than our share of good fortune. Not only that, we want the next life to be infinitely better! Floating up there with angels in God's divine presence! Well I have a better way of thinking about it. I thank my lucky stars that I'm here at all, I'm happy to be here and I want to make the best of it. Lusting after even more stops me from doing that. Instead of enjoying life and searching for what's really true, I find I have to conform to lots of rules invented in order to control me by weird men in Rome or elsewhere (it always seems to be men) and I have to worry that, unless I do the right things, I won't get the afterlife I want. Living like that is not making the best of it. It's a pretty dismal prospect, in fact. "There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life." Now where did I read that... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: punkfolkrocker Date: 02 Apr 16 - 10:04 AM ditto - wot steve said... plus - and on top of all that... what are the chances of anyone ever meeting that other one individual in millions who you can bond with happily for the rest of your life...???? .. gotta be grateful me and the mrs seem to tolerate each other so well for as long as we have... .. and, if that's not enough, she's also best mates with my mum... Putting all these infinite collisions of possibilities into perspective, can't really complain about my lack of financial success or purpose in life.. .. not even my irritable bowels.... 😜 It wouldn't even have occurred to me to worry about qualifying for a premium afterlife if not for the early childhood brainwashing at C of E infant & primary school, and all the diffuse indoctrination in wider early 60s provincial small town British society... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Dave the Gnome Date: 02 Apr 16 - 10:26 AM Glad to see that this thread has gone a lot more positive again:-) It's spring. We have daffodils growing, lambs in the field across the road and our one legged duck from last year has started visiting again. So, we have plenty of new life and at least one old timer like me has survived another winter. Most of us on here have plenty to be happy about so let's celebrate that :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Steve Shaw Date: 02 Apr 16 - 10:40 AM So, Dave, we know that the Pope's a Catholic, that bears shit in the woods (I saw it on an Attenborough).... so now all it needs is for you, seeing as how you have the wherewithal, to answer the final question: ...Do one-legged ducks swim in circles? I can give you a few minutes to blow your paddling pool up if you like... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Senoufou Date: 02 Apr 16 - 01:37 PM Quite agree - lots to be happy about. We have a regular large pheasant called Mr Magnificent, and he came into our garden today in all his beautiful Spring plumage. He absolutely shone, golden and glorious. And our enormous village swans did their usual annoying trick of standing right in the middle of the road like twits, while we all tried to usher them to the side. Once there, they always waddle back and do it again, the horrors. It's so true, we have tons to rejoice about, and in many ways, life here is heaven enough. I've even got a bit of a tan from sitting on our garden bench in the sun. I might even buy a bikini....er.... no, not such a good idea... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Dave the Gnome Date: 02 Apr 16 - 02:51 PM Steve - :-D I will test it out one day. For now I will relate that I was outvoted in naming him. He is known as 'Hobbles' by the family, which I think is rather cruel. I wanted to call him 'Awky'. 10 bob to who can tell me why :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Steve Shaw Date: 02 Apr 16 - 05:58 PM We could ask Jim... I believe it was a cruel epithet used for kids with a limp or something, especially oop north. And Jimmy Miller could be involved... I claim my ten bob and I'll have it in four half dollars please. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Jim Carroll Date: 03 Apr 16 - 03:46 AM "We could ask Jim.." Well- since you ask.....!! My grandparents lived in Stoke on Trent and when I was a child one of the bastard pottery firms took to dumping surplus glazing paint in the canal, which caused the many swans to try and scratch their back, the result being that they swam in circles. Never heard the saying used about lame kids - we weren't cruel like that in Liverpool; we just beat them up and threw away their crutches. Ducks quacks do echo though. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: frogprince Date: 03 Apr 16 - 10:48 AM How do you know whether that's the echo of a duck quack, or the sound of another duck quacking back ? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: punkfolkrocker Date: 03 Apr 16 - 10:56 AM What if a duck feeds back at high echo settings...??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Jim Carroll Date: 03 Apr 16 - 12:35 PM "or the sound of another duck quacking back ?" Damn - never thought of that - back to the carving block. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Jim Carroll Date: 03 Apr 16 - 01:02 PM Could ask this feller Jim CARROLL The Wee Duck I had a wee duck when I lived in Drummuck, And I ne'er had good luck since I parted the land, For some hungry thief took a longing for beef, And to steal my wee duck he invented a plan. At the head of my bed, where my swaddy she fed, And one morning in May, and it long before day, When I looked where she lay, alas she was stole! Chorus Och, och! and a naddy, my darling big swaddy! Och, och! and a naddy, anuck and anee! My duck was true blood as she waddled through mud She was fat as a crud and her wings she did shake; She was blue in the neck, ay, and broad in the back And double related to Flaherty's drake. Her eggs they were blue, most charming to view, Some night she laid two! Oh, and relate it with grief, May the curse of the dumb and orphan that's blind Be together combined and light down on the thief! Chorus Och, och! and a naddy, my darling big swaddy! Och, och! and a naddy, anuck and anee! I curse him again (I cannot refrain) nd you'll all say "Amen" when I finish my prayer ¯ May the bee and the wasp and the ape and the asp Be his daily companion through the market and the fair! May the weasel and the rat build their nests in his hat! May the eel ever bite him, and everything fright him, The monster that murdered my beautiful duck. Chorus Och, och! and a naddy, my darling big swaddy! Och, och! and a naddy, anuck and anee! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Dave the Gnome Date: 03 Apr 16 - 01:16 PM Nah, no one got it. Part of the playground repertoire was walking with a limp singing "Awky duck, Awky duck. I've broke my leg and I can't get up." The tune is well known. Can't really describe it. Laurel and Hardy piece maybe? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Steve Shaw Date: 03 Apr 16 - 03:17 PM Er, Dave, I was pretty warm. Ten bob please or I'll go thinking you're a bloody tyke. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Dave the Gnome Date: 03 Apr 16 - 03:47 PM OK, Steve. Send me your bank details and I will credit your account 10 bob;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Raggytash Date: 03 Apr 16 - 04:11 PM Careful Dave, he wants it in 4 half dollars, that will cost you £2.41. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Raggytash Date: 03 Apr 16 - 04:14 PM Bloody hell !! See what living in Yorkshire has done to me ............... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: DMcG Date: 03 Apr 16 - 05:16 PM Well, on londoncoins.co.uk at the moment is a ten shilling note for £160 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Joe Offer Date: 03 Apr 16 - 05:51 PM Raggy says: Strange the way religion moves the goal posts at regular intervals. And I'm rather glad it does move the goal posts. Other thinking changes with the times - why not religious thinking? Churches are beginning to realize that arcane theological disagreements really don't make any difference, so many don't bother about them very much. They're more interested in what's the basic purpose of every religion: appreciation of the earth and earth's creatures, which most religions deem to be a gift from the Source of Being, a gift to be treasured and protected. Yes, there are religious people who deem the earth to be something to be exploited, and people other than themselves as enemies to be defeated. I don't think that's the intent of most church people, however. But yes, there are exceptions - lots of them. And many people of faith are beginning to see their faith as a tradition, rather than as a "religion." They just are beginning to see that their traditions and rituals are built on sacred, treasured myths that may not necessarily be factual - but may be sacred treasure nonetheless. The religious people I know are most interested in raising their children, caring for their aging parents, and building a safe and peaceful community. As they always have, they do these things within the context of a religious tradition, but I think that can be a wonderful thing - especially if members of a community have a wide diversity of traditions to share and celebrate.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Greg F. Date: 03 Apr 16 - 06:14 PM But yes, there are exceptions - lots of them. There may be more exceptions than you think, Joe, considering the 57 anti-abortion laws passed by the several states in 2015, and the close to 300 abortion restictions thay're passed since 2010. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Steve Shaw Date: 03 Apr 16 - 06:15 PM Well, apart from forcing the point yet again about your sacred and treasured things, you could've been talking about the values of every atheist I know. There is absolutely nothing special about religious traditions, and there's plenty wrong with every one of them. Religion has no monopoly on virtue. In many ways, the opposite. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: DMcG Date: 03 Apr 16 - 06:26 PM I'd go further, Joe: the whole concept of goalpost is misleading. You can see how the history might have played out. You start from the golden rule of loving God and your neighbour,(whether in Christianity or not). Then someone with a binary sort of mind asks how you know you are giving God enough attention. Equally black and white clergy then start inventing rules saying no meat on Friday (taking the example above). Next someone asks what happens if I break the rule? So the legalistically minded start setting punishments and rewards and the whole thing develops into a whole mess of rules and regulations for no real reason except to transform the golden rule - which is necessarily entirely dependant on the exact circumstance of that particular person in that precise situation - into a set of rules and regulations that are completely rigid and don't take the situation into account at all. So to my mind if 'moving the goalposts' is getting rid of some of this well meant but ultimately obstructive legal dross to get back to the central commandments, it can only be a good thing. Sorry to everyone, in or out of the church, who likes nice clear rules, but we are talking about life, and life isn't like that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Joe Offer Date: 03 Apr 16 - 06:52 PM Religious people aren't as certain as they used to be about what happens after death. But I think many would say that they believe that somehow, it will all be OK after death. They see something beyond, but they don't know what it is. And Steve Shaw, still trying to defend his right to attack, says:
Dearest Steve, we're all enlightened people here. I don't think anyone here has argued that religious people are special or that they have a monopoly on virtue. Neither are atheists. But all deserve to be respected and tolerated, and not derided or redefined. All have something to contribute to the diversity of this world. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Steve Shaw Date: 03 Apr 16 - 06:59 PM Well, I think that the Church has to move goalposts constantly in order to try to retain some semblance of credibility. Rules about eating meat, doing your Easter duties, getting kids baptised as quickly as possible for fear of eternal Limbo, and the rules on contraception, etc., have to be slackened, not through any enlightenment on the Church's part (there's not much of that in a setup that makes saints out of evil buggers like John-Paul II and Mother Teresa) but because the rules lose the Church more and more credibility as the rest of the world progresses. It started with Galileo, or even earlier, carried on with Darwin and keeps on going, as pews empty, to this day. The Catholic Church is infamous for lagging behind, what with its men of marble at the helm. We will have gay marriage, we will have women priests, we will have married priests, we will have free contraception, we will have women's right to choose, oral sex and masturbation will be virtuous and none of anybody else's business. Especially the business of unmarried men in frocks. You embrace these modern things, the right things, or you lose your Church. Make your minds up and do it quickly and with good grace. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Steve Shaw Date: 03 Apr 16 - 07:17 PM "Dearest Steve" Patronise me at your peril, Holy Joe. I don't take kindly. OK? "we're all enlightened people here" Enlightened people don't believe in God, I'm afraid. " I don't think anyone here has argued that religious people are special or that they have a monopoly on virtue. " No but you don't half go on about your sacred treasures, etc., and get cross when we demur. That means you think you have something special. Take it from me, you don't. "But all deserve to be respected and tolerated," I respect your right to believe whatever nonsense you want to believe. I believe in a good deal of nonsense myself, as it happens. But I don't foist Liverpool FC on you. You foist your nonsense on other people - and tell them that it contains deeper truths. That's just wicked. And that does not only not deserve respect, it deserves the strongest possible condemnation. "All have something to contribute to the diversity of this world." Your faith militates against the understanding of the beauty and diversity of this world by imposing a terrible and useless explanation on it. The best thing you could ever do to contribute to that understanding would be to consign your improbable God to the sidelines and, for a change, start searching for what's really true. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: punkfolkrocker Date: 03 Apr 16 - 07:51 PM .. so just how long ago was the Age of Reason and Enlightenment....???? "God is dead" "If God does not exist, it would be necessary to invent him." etc.. etc.. etc... It's well over 3 decades ago since I was getting a good education attending seminars, and writing essays on all that stuff in Moral Philosophy modules of my Degree.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Joe Offer Date: 03 Apr 16 - 09:01 PM Steviebaby sez: Well, I think that the Church has to move goalposts constantly in order to try to retain some semblance of credibility. That's right, Steve. Changing our thinking with the times is something we all have to do, isn't it? If our thinking gets stale, we die. ...and go round and round in the circle game. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: punkfolkrocker Date: 03 Apr 16 - 09:23 PM Sad to know I let my mind stagnate through lack of stimulation - the overwhelming distracting problems of life at the arse end of the economic scale... .. so I'm finding this thread an excellent refresher course... cheers mudcat mates.... Just set the timer to record a Discovery / History channel docudrama about Judas.. The bit I saw earlier looked very good. I really do think the betrayal and execution story is excellent drama. Whether entirely fictional, or inspired by fragments of a true story, it's powerful and tragic.. Like I said before, I enjoy the tradition of watching a Jesus movie at easter time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Joe Offer Date: 03 Apr 16 - 09:25 PM And, dearest Steve, in case you didn't get the hint, insulting my religious tradition is something that I consider to be seriously rude and offensive. Despite your protestations that in Great Britain, such insults are considered to be friendly banter, I don't think most Britons would agree. In the U.S. and in most countries, insulting another person's religious tradition is considered to be in bad manners and bad taste, comparable to insulting the person directly. If you don't understand that, perhaps you'd better learn. I'm quite sure the same holds true in Great Britain. If you want to ask me specific and non-insulting about my religious tradition, that's one thing. If you want to insult what you think to be my religious tradition, that's offensive. Whether you like it or not, there are a huge number of Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, and people of other religious traditions in the world. Some of those people may actually possess more wisdom than you have. In the interest of world peace and harmony, it behooves you not to insult them, even though [surprise, surprise!] you may not think the same way they do . Thank you very much. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Steve Shaw Date: 03 Apr 16 - 10:19 PM "And, dearest Steve, in case you didn't get the hint," What hint? "insulting my religious tradition is something that I consider to be seriously rude and offensive". Bad luck. As you know, I consider that religion deserves all the ridicule and offence it gets, which is never enough. And you have no right not to be offended. " Despite your protestations that in Great Britain, such insults are considered to be friendly banter, I don't think most Britons would agree." I have never made any such protestation. Stay accurate and keep cool, Joe, is my advice. "In the U.S. and in most countries, insulting another person's religious tradition is considered to be in bad manners and bad taste, comparable to insulting the person directly. If you don't understand that, perhaps you'd better learn." Well too bad. Thank goodness we no longer burn people at the stake or cut off their heads for heresy, eh? Cor, that would solve a problem or two! "I'm quite sure the same holds true in Great Britain. If you want to ask me specific and non-insulting about my religious tradition, that's one thing." I don't need to ask you. As you may glean, I'm reasonably knowledgeable about Catholicism already. "If you want to insult what you think to be my religious tradition, that's offensive." I'm sure you're man enough to handle it. Eight years in a seminary should have provided you with all the answers to cope with an ignorant heathen such as myself. :-) Keep calm and carry on proselytising! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Joe Offer Date: 04 Apr 16 - 12:52 AM That's too bad, Steve. If you feel you must talk about religious faith in a combative manner, then I can't talk with you. When I was growing up, I heard all sorts of stuff about defending my faith and dying for my faith, and I didn't quite buy it. Nowadays, there are neoconservative "apologists" who are experts in doing battle in religious discussions, and they disgust me because their view of faith is shallow, legalistic, and combative - just like yours. When people like you try to box me into a corner to force me to do combat, that turns my stomach. I have no desire to defend my faith. I only want to live it. It's the tradition I grew up in, and I like it. It's part of me. You and Musket and Dave the Gnome and a few others are here for only one purpose: to wage war. You make me sick, all of you. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Dave the Gnome Date: 04 Apr 16 - 04:27 AM Why bring me into your argument with Steve, Joe? I do not think I have done anything untoward on this thread have I? Why bring Musket into it? He has not even posted here. Seems rather like you have no real answers so you launch a personal attack. Just who is it waging this war? I guess the next action will be to have the last word and then close thread... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 04 Apr 16 - 04:56 AM There have been so many such threads. Those Joe mentioned have certainly taken the same belligerent, intolerant position as Steve many, many times before. (Or will you distance yourself from it now Dave?) |
