|
|||||||
BS: According to Falwell |
Share Thread
|
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: Steve in Idaho Date: 15 Sep 01 - 09:45 PM I KNEW this was a Trolling thread - but NO I couldn't leave the Damn thing alone - had to read it. . . . Glad I did cause now spaw is rivaling LH in eloquence!! And Don Firth - you sure you aren't a preacher?? JUST JOKING - - - Too freakin funny - Farted in church - I'm gonna share that one with the crew come Monday - Peace Steve BTW - neither of those two assholes speak for me - |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: wysiwyg Date: 15 Sep 01 - 10:21 PM The nice ting about the liturgical churches is that you have to cover ALL of the material... you can't pick and choose your Bible readings to fit the sermon you feel like delivering, and you must preach on these readings as they come around. A pastor in that setting who preaches BS he isn't trying to live, himself, if run out of town pretty quick, as are pastors whose negativity is evident in their preaching-- because they will govern the lay leaders within that same negative paradigm. The positive outlook of the laity long nourished by better pastorates makes for a cognitive dissonance with the badhearted padre's approach. Also, in an apostolic-succession setting you have a counterbalance in the authority vested in the Bish, as well as the long-term deployment processes that mean a parish had ought to know who they are getting and choose with care. I am not saying it's magic or perfect, or that there are not difficult Bible lessons to be covered-- just last week we had "hate yer folks" (love Jesus more). That lesson can't be taken out of context with other material that bears on it, in our setting. ~S~ |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: Haruo Date: 15 Sep 01 - 10:30 PM That reminds me to ask (totally offtopic, but oh well), is there a website you can recommend for folks interested in following the Common Lectionary (or whatever one youse guys use) at a distance? Liland |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: kendall Date: 15 Sep 01 - 10:58 PM It's not only the ignorant flange heads that scare me, but, I know some reasonably intelligent people who buy this crock of shit. |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: catspaw49 Date: 15 Sep 01 - 10:58 PM Personally, I follow the Common Confectionary with an emphasis on Bismarcks. Spaw |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: wysiwyg Date: 15 Sep 01 - 11:24 PM Liland, I think there is. I'll have a look and let you know. ~S~ |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: wysiwyg Date: 15 Sep 01 - 11:33 PM Oy, I got lost there in a Google search on COMMON LECTIONARY ONLINE. Lots to choose from-- you pick. I found an Anglican Hymnal online site in there too! ~S~ |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: catspaw49 Date: 15 Sep 01 - 11:38 PM Liland, I hope this is useful. This is the Donut section of the Common Confectionary. The catechism here must be learned before moving on to Creme Puffs and Eclairs: The earliest evidence of the donut as an object of religious significance is the great megalith of Stonehenge, near Salisbury, England. Radiocarbon dating places the first activities at the site at around 2800 BC. At this time the site consisted of little more than a circular ditch with an internal bank, however it was quite recognizably toroidal, or donut-shaped. Around 2100 BC, people of the Beaker Culture erected a double ring of bluestone menhirs (standing stones). This donut-like double circle was oriented toward the summer solstice sunrise. It is thought that the people who erected the monument did not actually possess the donut, but this image clearly shows that they knew of it, and constructed Stonehenge as a primitive astronomical computer to precisely calibrate each years' calendar for the weekly religious observances around the dona-diache (d'uh-o-na-dee-och) or "day of the donut." While there are those who insist that both Stonehenge and the toroidal crop circles which occasionally appear in English fields are the work of advanced extraterrestrials who have been attempting to communicate with mankind through donut symbology for centuries, most respected scholars agree that the people of the Beaker Culture were merely highly prescient. This view is supported by their use of the beaker as an early form of mug, even though its significance and close association with the donut in European religious observances would not be realized until the introduction of coffee in the mid-17th century.
Part 1. Donuts and Religion in Early Civilizations This ancient Egyptian tomb painting (c. 2600 BC) from Deir el-Bahri depicts Anubis, the jackal-headed god, preparing a mummy. Donuts were possibly intended to sustain the departed soul on its journey to the infernal regions. It has been speculated that the glazing of donuts was motivated by the need to preserve them in order that they stay fresh for the mummy's use. The exact formulation of the glazing used by the ancient priests has been lost for centuries, however fragmentary papyrus records suggest that it was extraordinarily tasty.
Part 2. Western Religion and Donuts
Part 3. Donuts and Religion during the Renaissance Leonardo da Vinci's Madonna of the Donuts. c.1500, is the only surviving painting from the Renaissance period in which the halo is portrayed with its true significance. In all other known works the halos of religious figures were subdued in order to misdirect those not of the true faith, thus protecting the "Mystery of the Donut." It is known that Michelangelo's work was closely supervised by Pope Orange Julius II during the creation of the frescoes, and it is likely that he ordered the donut in this scene to be painted over. In "The Creation," one of Michelangelo's ceiling frescos in the Sistine Chapel, Adam is being given a donut by God. c.1508-1512. This painting became the subject of intense public debate during the restoration of the Sistine Chapel frescoes in the 1980s. In the end, it was decided that the frescoes should be preserved in the form (the One Calorie, Diet Frescoe form) that had become familiar over the centuries, and this highly significant inclusion of the donut has been lost once again.
Part 4. Donuts and the Reformation In fact, one aspect of the Protestant movement which dramatically demonstrates that the basic religious importance of the donut was never in question is the establishment of the tradition in the United States of Thanksgiving Day by the English Separatist Puritans know as the Pilgrims. While Thanksgiving Day has been celebrated on both the 3rd Thursday of November and the 4th at various times in U.S. history, it has always been relegated to Thursday in order that Friday remain inviolate for the observance of Donut Day. (In North America, Donut Day is so important that Canada celebrates Thanksgiving on Monday.)
Part 5. Humanism and Donuts The debate on this point still continues, with the insistence by various religions that Donut Day is a holy observance, while Donut Humanists claim that the the eating of donuts on Friday is an merely an expression of Man's free will. Perhaps the Donuts will have the last laugh. Spaw
|
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: wysiwyg Date: 15 Sep 01 - 11:41 PM LOL! Spaw, is that Donut worship thing related to the mammarian worship that Amos has taught on here a time or two? The connection could be through the bagel-- "Bubbelah!" ~S~ |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: Bill D Date: 15 Sep 01 - 11:48 PM this is what I found online during a search about logic & reason (and that ain't even the scary one) |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: wysiwyg Date: 15 Sep 01 - 11:55 PM Try THIS instead. The summer "Crosscurrents" issue online happens to be about violence and theology. I just found this site so I do not know enough to endorse it-- interested in others' opinions. ~S~ |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: catspaw49 Date: 16 Sep 01 - 01:10 AM I haven't read yours yet Susan, but I did read Bill's and I mean no offense to any real Christians out there, but I gotta' tell ya'..........The donut thing makes infinitely more sense! Spaw |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: Troll Date: 16 Sep 01 - 01:57 AM I dunno 'Spaw. It doesn't seem to take creame-filled donuts into account. I'm not sure I could handle a religion that didn't accept creame-filled donuts. And what about donut holes?troll |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: GUEST,AKRick Date: 16 Sep 01 - 08:11 AM Ahh yes, Falwell and Robertson ... the American taliban, if they had their way. I had planned on hitting this thread with a rant 'till I read thru it. Thankfully, there is this threads kind of humor to help most people keep some sort of perspective. Thanx folks, you've made my morning. ... farted in church ... |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: wysiwyg Date: 16 Sep 01 - 10:08 AM Well if you want to REALLY enjoy a church fart you have to be sitting right in front of a real good microphone. *G* The acoustics in our church are pretty good tho, even without a mic. Last night a little lap baby let out the biggest and most resonant eructation I have ever heard... fortunately for the serious nature of the moment it was an oral, not rectal eruption, or I think I'd have lost it. ~S~ |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: katlaughing Date: 16 Sep 01 - 11:00 AM Spawdarlin', I think you owe it to the world to go on a Crusade of the Donut and make your mission of zeal to convert as many as possible, STARTING with these two bozos! LMAO!! Brill! |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: Tedham Porterhouse Date: 16 Sep 01 - 11:18 AM According to Norton1: "I KNEW this was a Trolling thread - but NO I couldn't leave the Damn thing alone - had to read it. . . ." No, this was not a trolling thread. I started this thread, with an article taken directly from the Washington Post, to show that those who would pervert religion are not limited to the extremeists of other parts of the world, they include some of the most prominent of American "Christians." The likes of Falwell and Robertson have long been prominent in the ranks of the Republican Party and no Republican of recent memory, not Reagan, not Bush, and not Bush II could have been elected as our president without their support.
|
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: Bill D Date: 16 Sep 01 - 11:29 AM That site, Susan, is a subscrtiption site seemingly dedicated to promoting inter-faith cooperation and understanding amnong PEOPLE WHO ARE ALREADY COMMITTED to a religious perspective. It in no way addresses the problem of irrationality exemplified, but not limited to, sites and attitudes like the one I picked as a semi-scary example. I do NOT intend to use this forum in an ongoing way to vent my frustration with perversions of logic and rationality to support dubious enterprises and positions...{{translation: I ain't gonna go knocking on doors or standing on street corners...RT or VT, handing out pamphlets on athiesm and trying to get people to leave their churches}}...but I may on occasion, when provoked by threads on Falwell and his ilk, try to at least give some suggestions about what the issues and ways of approaching them really are. here is the list of sites I was reading thru when I stumbled on the other one. They are early hits from a search on the phrase "from false premises" http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/logic.html#slope http://www.animalliberationfront.com/Philosophy/people_logic.htm http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ383.HTM http://www.csama.org/199805NL.HTM http://www.les.appstate.edu/courses/research/Session3/tsld001.htm http://www.plusroot.com/dbook/22Certain.html http://www.uncanny.net/~wetzel/connection.htm http://www.kcmetro.cc.mo.us/longview/ctac/corenotes.htm http://www.gaydeceiver.com/quotes/ oh...sometimes I will show more humor in my posts...donuts & the like. I'm just not in the mood today. |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: wysiwyg Date: 16 Sep 01 - 11:39 AM Bill, I only offered that as an example that people who pray also are people who think. A search based on the phrase "from false premises" would have been pretty skewed I think-- and that's fine with me: you are coming from one view and should IMO say what you see from there. But I am not going to leave the well-publicized RRR view and the backlash it generates unanswered any more, and I will speak from what I know personally and see on a daily basis to respond when I can with what I think may be sense. What I think is notable abot this thread is that IMO it was NOT started as a troll, it comes from a member we can communicate with privately if that seems necessary, and we are not saying in this thread (I think), "Here is what YOU SHOULD DO, BELIEVE, THINK, SAY...." And instead we are writing about our own views, for a change. To the extent this thread continues in that vein I will participate. If it gets hijacked by ugliness I'm outta there. I would not have started this thread, myself, but I will participate if it is an effort to THINK together. It also is a thread directly related to the PR presence the RRR has built, and I have a lot on my mind about that-- since I deal with the results of it on a daily basis. ~Susan |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: catspaw49 Date: 16 Sep 01 - 11:48 AM oh...sometimes I will show more humor in my posts...donuts & the like. I'm just not in the mood today. The good thing here Bill is that you can. I think different emotions happen to all of us at differing times, especially after events like this past week. I have been alternately morbid, happy, thoughtful, angered, rational, and beyond any form of reasoning. Sometimes the problems we have here are due to the different times we all hit thos peaks valleys. It's always best if I can think who Bill D. really is and then I can always figure the mood and not respond to the instant. Last night in a tension relieving burst of giddiness, I would make a joke of anything and indeed made one I would never have made had I been even halfway thinking. Thanks for the sites BTW.......Some interesting(?) stuff there. I'd comment more but I have only skimmed two since today, in my mood, I just ain't up to it. (:<)) Spaw |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: Steve in Idaho Date: 16 Sep 01 - 11:56 AM Tedham - I was making a joke of the "trolling thread" part. My apologies if I seemed insensitive - And not just my wanting to get my hands on knotheads like these two religious shmucks. My mind and heart, like most others, is mush. I have to find some humor somewhere - and I found it with spaw again. Doughnuts - know how the hole is made?? NEVER mind - that smacks of connection, or is that. . . .!! Peace Steve |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: Bill D Date: 16 Sep 01 - 01:07 PM " A search based on the phrase "from false premises" would have been pretty skewed I think-- " yup...skewed towards logical thinking, in the main. Though that is *ahem* inconvenient for some, it is a standard phrase used in the teaching of logic and helping people to understand the differences between **TRUTH** and **VALIDITY** and how to analyze discussions and arguments so as to be aware of whether conclusions are either. This is not a one day exercise, ...the points made about formal and informal fallacies are not all intuitively obvious and require some study, but they ARE important. People all around the world are increasing the level of rhetoric about events and their own opinions, and to put it mildly, the BS levels are astounding! I am afraid that much of the pain in the world today is entwined in religious differences, and the recent INCREASE in pain was both promoted BY and is being responded to BY, appeals to religious principles and ideals. The dangers in this should be obvious....God or Allah, or the "Great I AM" cannot be on all sides in these matters, but armies are being readied in "ITS" name. Those pilots flew those planes believing that they were going directly to Heaven as Martyrs.....and many people believe that they went directly to Hell for their sins................please forgive me for my feeble attempt to point out that it is possible that neither view is necessarily true. It is perfectly possible to live a good, sane, useful, productive, happy, friendly, caring life without accepting ANY tenents based on the Torah, the Bible, the Koran, the Bhagavad Gita, Ohaspe, The Upanishads, The Urantia Book, Nostradamus, Edgar Cayce, Joseph Smith or the Crocodile god of the Bantus.................that being said, I will defend the right of followers of those paths to gain solice and comfort as they will....but when they USE those writings and attitudes to affect the politics and social fabric of MY life, I have no compunctions about posting little jibes about their distortions of logic. way more than I intended to say, and about 2% of what I needed to say. |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: Art Thieme Date: 16 Sep 01 - 01:11 PM I think Pat and Jerry are completely wrong and ought to quit playing with people's minds at this very emotional and vulnerable time for weak-minded ones so willing to be led like sheep on thir Crusade.
Mainly, I think they ought to go back to making ice cream. ;-) Art Thieme |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: Amos Date: 16 Sep 01 - 01:14 PM claim this is proof that the donut is not of divine origin. This is rampant heresy and should not be tolerated on this thread. Anyway pushing this screwy perverted notion should be taken out and eaten. And no more wisecracks about how they make the Holiest of Holes. Or you'll start yet another Ass Holey War, and wee don't want that!! LOL Spaw, I love your religion. The Temple of the Golden Globes extends its cups in fellowship to donut worshippers everywhere. I would recommend that we plan a series of combined services. We'll bring the Mammaries, you bring the Donuts. And let the wild rumpus BEGIN! On a serious note I think all of the recognized mainstream religions on this planet are just plain silly. No matter whose they are. I'm with Kendall on this one. The very concept of "organizing" a religion is a monstrous oxymoron anyway. And people like Falwell should learn the importance of the separation of Church and State and keep their Goddamned noses out of matters of state. A. |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: wysiwyg Date: 16 Sep 01 - 02:14 PM This has become a thread of argument, not sharing information. I love you all dearly but I'm out. ~S~ |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: Deckman Date: 17 Sep 01 - 12:08 AM These two are doing us a big FAVOR. Now we can see and know clear examples of HATE MONGERING. This week we've seen one horrible result on the East coast. I wonder how many future terrorists are in their congregations. I know Falwells' religion from the inside ... I was raised in it. |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: Peg Date: 17 Sep 01 - 11:08 PM too right, Deckman. |
Subject: RE: According to Falwell From: GUEST,Sonja Date: 18 Sep 01 - 02:34 AM In view of several of the comments posted above, as well as the Robertson and Falwell comments that spawned this thread, I've gotta post this old song which I resurrected earlier this year [and, on one verse, just now]. Sorry I can't post the tune, but I don't know how. The Christian Coalition Song © 2001 Sonja W.0ates adapted from The Moral Majority Song © 1983 Sonja Wilde-Oates Well, our country's going down the tubes, for sure -- Free love, women's lib, and other kinds of crime. But the Christian Coalition's on the march To keep every one of you in line. Oh, yes, it's all well, we've got Jerry Falwell And the vigilant Religous Right to run our private lives. Individual freedoms, hey, we don't need 'em, 'Cause when folks are free they may not do The things we think they oughta do, So, we're gonna keep an eye on you, Joe Offer,* Till the judgment day arrives. Well, the Trade Center terror was an awful shame -- Something that should be abhorred--, But Jerry says we oughta blame the liberals and the gays; It's a spanking from the Lord! Oh, yes indeedy, we've got Ralph Reed-y, Gonna legislate morality and keep us going straight. We'll save our kiddoes from their libidoes. If you're a teenage lass, and not a lad, And you try to be safe while you're being bad, We're gonna tell your mom and da-ad, so prepare to procreate. Socialism's not our bag, you should make it on your own. We'll protect your rights till birth--then you're on your own. But happily, we've got Phyllis Schlafly, Telling women we should know our place & teaching right from wrong. We'll save our nation from fornication. We're gonna ban obscenity, take rape and violence off TV & put 'em back in the home, where they oughta be-- We gotta keep the family strong. Jerry wants to save your soul from sin, Sleaze and pornographic trash (like: "The Nation," "Ms.,", "Mother Jones"). Keep those checks and dollars coming in; we take credit cards or cash. But it's all well, we've got Jerry Falwell And his counter-evolutionary crew To teach our nation's youth. Of Darwin's theory we're kinda leary, So we'll teach the Bible's theory 'Cause we don't want to think that we Ever swung from our tails from tree to tree In hairy birthday suits. Peace is overrated. War can be divine 'Long as national interest is the bottom line. Yes, without bias, I say we're pious. We worked our pious fannies off to stop the ERA. Let's have a hand for the things we stand for: It's down with commies, up with nukes, We don't burn bras, we just burn books, We love the right, so we knock the kooks --and fry the crooks!***-- That's the good old American, Moral Majority, Christian Coalition way. *Insert name of your favorite infidel, commie, liberal, etc. **The original verse was, "Well, the aids epidemic is an awful shame-- Something that should be abhorred--, but Jerry says it only strikes the dopers and the gays -- It's a spanking from the Lord." ***Original 1983 lyrics, "... and bomb the gooks!" Sonja |