|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » The Pagan 'problem' |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
|
The Eternal 924 posts |
Sep 24, 2010, 23:35
|
||
|
[quote="thesweetcheat I also take offence when those in the higher echelons of organised religions like catholicism are held up as "speaking for all 6m catholics in the UK" or whatever. Do they? Do all catholics genuinely agree 100% with the views espoused by their designated mouthpiece? I doubt it. I live in a secular country, where we have a hereditary system of monarchy in which I have no say. Does this mean that the Queen speaks for me? Do I share her views? No. So how does the pope represent the views of all catholics?[/quote] And what was that in the Bible about? Ah yes, I remember now: "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven." Well, that's the Pope fucked then, and all those associated with the Vatican. And I was brought up a Catholic, so no bias. A non-practising TE.
|
|||
thesweetcheat 6216 posts |
Sep 24, 2010, 23:45
|
||
|
The Eternal wrote: thesweetchea wrote: I also take offence when those in the higher echelons of organised religions like catholicism are held up as "speaking for all 6m catholics in the UK" or whatever. Do they? Do all catholics genuinely agree 100% with the views espoused by their designated mouthpiece? I doubt it. I live in a secular country, where we have a hereditary system of monarchy in which I have no say. Does this mean that the Queen speaks for me? Do I share her views? No. So how does the pope represent the views of all catholics? And what was that in the Bible about? Ah yes, I remember now: "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven." Well, that's the Pope fucked then, and all those associated with the Vatican. And I was brought up a Catholic, so no bias. A non-practising TE. I'm guessing that the pope doesn't speak on your behalf then TE?
|
|||
|
GLADMAN 950 posts |
Sep 24, 2010, 23:53
|
||
|
Jane wrote: Dawkins doesn't want you to think he is particularly clever (though he is); all he wants people to do is to think things out logically and rationally for themselves by examining the evidence. The reason he is so strident about it is because he (like me and millions of others) are FED UP to the back teeth with those who assert religious privilege. By pussy-footing around the believers in case we cause offence, we prolong their unfair privilege. Happily, I was not in the UK when Pope Ratzinger visited, so I didn't have to breathe the same air as him. Exactly. Probably wishful thinking on my part, but didn't Dougal in Father Ted once utter 'The Pope? That gobshite.... what does he know about religion anyway?'
|
|||
|
Resonox 604 posts |
Sep 25, 2010, 05:37
|
||
|
Just an observation..... Isn't it strange that many people who lay claim to being non-religious, quote the bible/talmud/qoran/puranas etc etc to emphasise a point or to illustrate a flaw in that religion...or...stranger still are the ones who eschew one religious text as being a load of mystic bunkum only to hang on the coat-tails of another(in their view)more mystic text..Was it George Burns who in his 90s said,"I believe in every religion...at my age I think it's best to hedge your bets!"
|
|||
tjj 3606 posts |
Sep 25, 2010, 08:09
|
||
|
Resonox wrote: Just an observation..... Isn't it strange that many people who lay claim to being non-religious, quote the bible/talmud/qoran/puranas etc etc to emphasise a point or to illustrate a flaw in that religion...or...stranger still are the ones who eschew one religious text as being a load of mystic bunkum only to hang on the coat-tails of another(in their view)more mystic text..Was it George Burns who in his 90s said,"I believe in every religion...at my age I think it's best to hedge your bets!" How about a little bit of 'live and let live'; if someone's faith gets them through life's trials and tribulations, then why knock it. If someone else turns to an ancient eastern philosophy to discover that by being 'still' many of their worries become manageable, so what. Whatever gets you through the night ... surely has to be better than obilterating reality with alcohol or drugs. Here is someone wise beyond their years who turned his back on fame and fortune, gave it all away and has been sneered at ever since. Who are we to say he was wrong. I'm off out now, into the cool sunshine ... Cherhill Down here I come. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jek6iP6AuAQ
|
|||
Sanctuary 4670 posts |
Sep 25, 2010, 09:27
|
||
|
tjj wrote: Resonox wrote: Just an observation..... Isn't it strange that many people who lay claim to being non-religious, quote the bible/talmud/qoran/puranas etc etc to emphasise a point or to illustrate a flaw in that religion...or...stranger still are the ones who eschew one religious text as being a load of mystic bunkum only to hang on the coat-tails of another(in their view)more mystic text..Was it George Burns who in his 90s said,"I believe in every religion...at my age I think it's best to hedge your bets!" How about a little bit of 'live and let live'; if someone's faith gets them through life's trials and tribulations, then why knock it. If someone else turns to an ancient eastern philosophy to discover that by being 'still' many of their worries become manageable, so what. Whatever gets you through the night ... surely has to be better than obilterating reality with alcohol or drugs. Here is someone wise beyond their years who turned his back on fame and fortune, gave it all away and has been sneered at ever since. Who are we to say he was wrong. I'm off out now, into the cool sunshine ... Cherhill Down here I come. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jek6iP6AuAQ I thought of David Ike when reading that tjj...nuff said!!
|
|||
goffik 3926 posts |
Sep 25, 2010, 10:14
|
||
|
I didn't follow the link cos I thought it was a David Icke video! :D He's a nutjob, isn't he? Hilarious, but obviously deluded. His website is either the work of a comedy genius or a seriously unhinged mind! Cat Stephens always seemed like a nice bloke tho. When he wasn't banging on about the lizards, that is! Oh, hang on. No. I'm getting mixed up... ;) G x
|
|||
|
Sanctuary 4670 posts |
Sep 25, 2010, 11:46
|
||
|
goffik wrote: I didn't follow the link cos I thought it was a David Icke video! :D He's a nutjob, isn't he? Hilarious, but obviously deluded. His website is either the work of a comedy genius or a seriously unhinged mind! Cat Stephens always seemed like a nice bloke tho. When he wasn't banging on about the lizards, that is! Oh, hang on. No. I'm getting mixed up... ;) G x Being a Southampton boy Goff you'll remember Ickey from his Southern Television days when he was a pretty good sports presenter. Strange how he went and as you say, completely deluded. There was a YouTube clip out about a year ago where he was going from stone to stone in the Great Circle at Avebury being sort of completely sensible...then sudenly kicked off about reptillians and how they were taking over the world. Sigh!
|
|||
|
GLADMAN 950 posts |
Sep 25, 2010, 13:39
|
||
|
tjj wrote: How about a little bit of 'live and let live'; if someone's faith gets them through life's trials and tribulations, then why knock it. If someone else turns to an ancient eastern philosophy to discover that by being 'still' many of their worries become manageable, so what. Whatever gets you through the night ... surely has to be better than obilterating reality with alcohol or drugs. I agree with Tjj up to a point... hey, if you want to confide in, say, The Honey Monster to help you through the day it's no-one else's business but yours as long as it doesn't have a detrimental affect on anyone else. This is the key point for me.... George Bush and Blair happily telling the world that their imaginary God friend TOLD them to invade Iraq is no more valid than some nutter saying that voices in his head told him to kill 'em all down his local school! Why is the latter deemed insane, the former not. What is the difference? Can't see it myself. The touble with these organised religions is they simply cannot let everyone else be... it's all about power and money, isn't it? Christians HAVE to save you, whether you like it or not. Muslims say they detest violence and then go about proving the exact opposite over and over again to the infidels. And what evidence do they have that they are right? None. They just KNOW. Dawkins may sometimes be an arrogant bugger, but it must be bloody difficult dealing with people who are so entrenched that any argument is superfluous. As far as I can see the aethiests are the only people who actually present any evidence whatsoever for their viewpoint, a viewpoint which is incidentally not based upon fear and retribution either, but on logic and balance of probability. A viewpoint that doesn't advocate going back to being children because we can't cope with the adult state. Religion worked when the medieval lord in his castle worked hand in hand with the church to maintain the monopoly of power through fear. Heh! heh! You stratch my back and I'll scratch yours...Keep the peasants illiterate and they won't find the gaping holes in the bible and start asking awkward questions. Education has been the key in allowing the layman to expose the bible etc for the sham I believe it to be. Didn't Richey Edwards say 'I am all the things that you regret. A truth that washes, that learnt how to spell'? But I'm ranting, I guess. Ah, 'scuse me... I'll just go and ask Eric Cantona what he thinks. He's making tea in the kitchen, by the way. Takes ages, too. Perfectionist. Yeah, no-one can see him, but I KNOW he's there. Kylie, ask him to get a move on, pet.
|
|||
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Sep 25, 2010, 13:53
|
||
|
Nice post Mr G, especially this bit - Dawkins may sometimes be an arrogant bugger, but it must be bloody difficult dealing with people who are so entrenched that any argument is superfluous. As far as I can see the aethiests are the only people who actually present any evidence whatsoever for their viewpoint, a viewpoint which is incidentally not based upon fear and retribution either, but on logic and balance of probability. A viewpoint that doesn't advocate going back to being children because we can't cope with the adult state.
|
| Pages: 14 – [ Previous | 1 … 8 9 10 11 12 13 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
