Marshal805: The Bible, Bronies, and John Lennon.


"Welcome to Fark!"

radarlove


The message is what saves the world, not the magic.

Modern Christianity: We're gonna save the sh*t out of you.

/used to be Christian
//got better

SilentStrider
2012-08-20 10:10:50 AM

sigdiamond2000: Whatever its politics, I think we can all agree that "Imagine" is an absolutely awful song, along with most of Lennon and McCartney's solo work.

Think again.


F U

/what's even better is their solo work attacking each other
//love's me some 'How Do You Sleep?'

The above comment was directed at sigdiamond2000, not SilentStrider.

I'm a big fan of John and Paul's solo work, George's too

What I thought religion was when I believed:



What I realized what religion was once I started asking serious questions:

live for today, live like you might die tomorrow, that`s what they tell you, right? Get drunk, have sex, do drugs because you might be dead tomorrow! What they don`t tell you is what to do if you don`t die tomorrow. What they don`t tell you is what to do if you have been living like that for 15 years and you are drunk, broke, fat and wheezing, you`ve got herpes and unwanted children, and you say "Man, I`m not even close to dead!" Now you have to explain to the IRS why you haven`t filed in 10 years "I was sort of counting on this whole `dead tomorrow` thing but it didn`t pan out the way I was expecting"

I'm confused. Is this an anti-religion thread or a pony thread? I don't know what to wear!

verbaltoxin: Worst song? No votes yet for "Friday?"

The debate was the worst song ever published.
Youtube doesn't count.

Okieboy: The above comment was directed at sigdiamond2000, not SilentStrider.

I'm a big fan of John and Paul's solo work, George's too

Wha.....?

"This song is just seven words long,
This song is just seven words long."

_{?"I've got my mind set on you"}

Uchiha_Cycliste: MCStymie: Uchiha_Cycliste: SirPeteTheGreat: sigdiamond2000:

"Wonderful Christmastime" is the worst song ever recorded in the history of music. I defy anyone to name a song worse than that one.

"Boobies" by Carlos Adolfo Dominguez. (not filter-pwned, either)

HEY Macarena!

Don't leave the cake out in the rain.

Ma-ia-hii
Ma-ia-huu
Ma-ia-hoo
Ma-ia-haha
Alo, Salut, sunt eu, un haiduc

As always, my vote for "worst song ever" goes to "I Wanna be with U" by Fun Factory.

ChipNASA: [25.media.tumblr.com image 250x332]

Moe-ny?


Jesus farking christ, my eyes... my eyes...

dready zim: live for today, live like you might die tomorrow, that`s what they tell you, right? Get drunk, have sex, do drugs because you might be dead tomorrow! What they don`t tell you is what to do if you don`t die tomorrow. What they don`t tell you is what to do if you have been living like that for 15 years and you are drunk, broke, fat and wheezing, you`ve got herpes and unwanted children, and you say "Man, I`m not even close to dead!" Now you have to explain to the IRS why you haven`t filed in 10 years "I was sort of counting on this whole `dead tomorrow` thing but it didn`t pan out the way I was expecting"

Sam Kinison?

radarlove

The message of "be kind and give" automatically transforms society once it is embraced part and parcel. The world, in my opinion, doesn't need to be saved. It is exactly where it needs to be. Always has been, always will be. The strife is an important part of the process.

Be kind and give? I thought we were talking about Christianity. You know...gays are a sinful abomination and we must pass laws to stop them. Non-believers suffer in hell for eternity. F*ck the poor. Get a job, loser. Family planning is the devil. Your sky wizard is an impostor. you know...

And Jesus said unto the Republicans, "Let he who has pre-existing condition forever be denied coverage to suffer and face financial hardships for insurance companies shall always be profitable. Repeal Romneycare."


/whatever, I am just sick of religions

SpectroBoy: Mugato: God I'm sick of hearing about John Lennon and the farking Beatles in general. Die, boomers, farking die already.

So I guess you wouldn't mind naming a few of YOUR favorite bands.

Difficulty; you can only list bands NOT influenced by the Beatles.

Oh here we go again. The Beatlemaniac "influence" circle jerk. Guess what, asshole - music did not begin and end with the farking Beatles. In fact, they very nearly destroyed music, you simple fark.

busy chillin': radarlove

The message of "be kind and give" automatically transforms society once it is embraced part and parcel. The world, in my opinion, doesn't need to be saved. It is exactly where it needs to be. Always has been, always will be. The strife is an important part of the process.

Be kind and give? I thought we were talking about Christianity. You know...gays are a sinful abomination and we must pass laws to stop them. Non-believers suffer in hell for eternity. F*ck the poor. Get a job, loser. Family planning is the devil. Your sky wizard is an impostor. you know...

And Jesus said unto the Republicans, "Let he who has pre-existing condition forever be denied coverage to suffer and face financial hardships for insurance companies shall always be profitable. Repeal Romneycare."


/whatever, I am just sick of religions

Hey, god wanted those people to be sick and suffering for a reason! Who are you to go against god's plan?

radarlove: trappedspirit: Banned on the Run: No, radarlove hit the point of Christianity on the nose.
You're talking about the rules of Christianity.

Those are also the "point" of many other religions. The key thing about Christianity is that God supposedly gave his son as a sacrifice to save the world. If you pull the magical stuff out, you are left with good intentions, but not Christianity.

The message is what saves the world, not the magic.

The salvation is eternal life, aka magic.

Ask yourself this: in a general and objective sense (or as close to such a thing as exists), which is the most important thing in life: to do well or to feel good? If you have a different answer to this question, that's fine: you can use it instead, but if you don't mind sharing it then please do so. Remember also that this question is meant to be observer-independent: you're not just talking about what is most important to you, but what is most important in a general sense, including to you but not limited to you.

Now, imagine what life would be like if you believed the other one (your answer is different from the two I listed, then pick whichever of the two feels further from your answer as "other"). How would this affect your life? How would it affect the way you perceive right and wrong? How would it affect the way you expect others to behave (not in a moral sense, just in an anticipatory one)? How would it affect the way you see your own behavior and/or moderate it?

Odds are, you will very quickly come up with a mindset that feels quite alien to your own. It may agree with you on a lot of things, but will almost certainly come at them from very different paths. You will probably also find that, coming from this altered core value, some -perhaps many- of the things you believe actually don't make sense anymore. They still will from the perspective you actually hold, of course, but alternate perspectives can be strange like that (and perhaps more than a little frightening).

Why do I bring this up? Because I believe that most of the philosophical, political, and religious debates that we've gotten into over the last century or so basically reduce to this very difference. Between us, we've gotten the low-hanging fruit -the things that can be reached from either viewpoint, though through very different paths and directions- fairly (if not completely) close to resolved. Most of what's left are the fundamental incompatibilities: the things that make no sense at all from one side but are easy to see, if not always outright intuitive, from the other. Because we're dealing almost exclusively with things that seem irrational to one side or the other, neither side remembers anymore that the other side even thinks.

And ultimately, what this bishop is trying to do is a kind of outreach, from the do-well side to the feel-good side. Phrasing the question as "what is it like to be Christian" is rather presumptuous, because Christianity itself is struggling along these lines too, with older dominations tending toward the former side and newer denominations tending toward the latter. But the basic idea of an outreach from one side of the gulf to the other remains the same, and is frankly a very good goal. It should be encouraged. That's not to say that some criticism isn't due, but the idea is not just a sound one, but frankly a necessary one, and I hope someone tries to bridge the gulf the other way. Otherwise, I don't see an end for this other than one side silencing the other, and I don't think either side really wants to do that.

SilentStrider: sigdiamond2000: Whatever its politics, I think we can all agree that "Imagine" is an absolutely awful song, along with most of Lennon and McCartney's solo work.

Think again.

Ah, the true gods message to all creation. Directly contradicting every other religions dogma.

Banned on the Run: dready zim: live for today, live like you might die tomorrow, that`s what they tell you, right? Get drunk, have sex, do drugs because you might be dead tomorrow! What they don`t tell you is what to do if you don`t die tomorrow. What they don`t tell you is what to do if you have been living like that for 15 years and you are drunk, broke, fat and wheezing, you`ve got herpes and unwanted children, and you say "Man, I`m not even close to dead!" Now you have to explain to the IRS why you haven`t filed in 10 years "I was sort of counting on this whole `dead tomorrow` thing but it didn`t pan out the way I was expecting"

Sam Kinison?

doug stanhope, close but no clinton cigar...

Shadow Blasko: Rueened: "Peek A Boo' by Siouxsie & The Banshees.

You go to hell and die

Good, good. Let the hate flow through you.

Sometimes a song is just a song. John Lennon wrote a song, not a philosophical treatise.

Ah, I love the smell of self-righteous close-minded stupidity in the morning. Sitting around complaining that everyone is dumb because they don't think the way they do. Seriously, where are the grown ups in this thread?


/Oh right. They're the ones posting ponies.

Well subby, I can't honestly say your headline was or was not trolling but I have to admit brought out the crazy in a whole lot of people.

"Imagine" probably reflects the teachings of Jesus Christ more accurately that any song written in the 20th century. Jesus certainly has been quoted as saying just about everything in those lyrics. Interesting that "modern Christians" find these teachings to be suddenly naive. Perhaps they should stop calling themselves Christians.

/Easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, etc.

Why isn't their room in the claptrap museum of ludicrous ideas for both the song and Christianity?

/ Paul, much like god, is dead.
// imagine all the hymns were replaced with beatles songs, I could avoid both simultaneously.

verbaltoxin: indylaw: verbaltoxin: 0Icky0: Cloudchaser Sakonige the Red Wolf: Trying to explain faith to an unbeliever is like trying to explain a rainbow to someone who's been blind since birth. Words can't convey the feeling. It's something that has to be experienced.

Nonsense. Many unbelievers were formerly believers and remember very well what the experience was like.

That whole thing about rainbows sums up the magical thinking of the religious right there. A rainbow is light being diffused through a prism. Yes it's pretty, but it's not miraculous and you can create one with a piece of glass. To a Christian though it's God's promise not to drown us all again, so it is something amazing and miraculous, even though you can see a rainbow in a dirty puddle.

I love it when atheists explain my own religion to me. Yes, you're right - every time I see a rainbow, I think not "oh, hey, it's a rainbow," but "Praise Jesus, I'm not going to have to build a giant ship and gather a bunch of animals!" A prism would shatter my entire worldview. Please don't show me one or my head might assplode.

The rainbow is specified in the Bible to be God's promise to Noah to not destroy the Earth again. That's what Christianity teaches. Science discovered what rainbows actually are. The point here is that one believer, a Farker, professed that you can't explain to a blind person what it's like to see a rainbow, just like you can't explain what it's like to believe in God to an unbeliever. Yet that was refuted by another Farker, by pointing out the fact that atheists often are former believers. We already know what it's like to believe in God.

I made the additional point that Christian perspectives are informed by magical thinking, ergo the Bible story. It's not enough that a rainbow be a natural act. It has to be God's act as well. It's superimposed upon a perfectly normal, elegant and natural phenomenon such as a rainbow. It's not needed. It is insisted upon by religion. The rainbow comparison is ...

Comments like this generally make the assumption that most Christians believe that magic is on par with reality.

Most of us do not.

whatsupchuck: "Imagine" probably reflects the teachings of Jesus Christ more accurately that any song written in the 20th century. Jesus certainly has been quoted as saying just about everything in those lyrics. Interesting that "modern Christians" find these teachings to be suddenly naive. Perhaps they should stop calling themselves Christians.

/Easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, etc.

Agreed.
I could make a case for what you're saying. No countries, no religion, no greed? Yup.

Well there is the heaven thing, but I'm pretty sure most Christians I know will deny being focused on heaven as a reason for what ever it is they do. But then again, they like to flip-flop on that issue as it suits them.

radarlove: trappedspirit: radarlove: trappedspirit: Banned on the Run: No, radarlove hit the point of Christianity on the nose.
You're talking about the rules of Christianity.

Those are also the "point" of many other religions. The key thing about Christianity is that God supposedly gave his son as a sacrifice to save the world. If you pull the magical stuff out, you are left with good intentions, but not Christianity.

The message is what saves the world, not the magic.

The salvation is eternal life, aka magic.

I think you, like many Christians, are misunderstanding the term "eternal life." This isn't magic, it is quantum mechanics. The quantum data of all things lives on, forever, until the universe re-collapses into its original singularity state and starts the process all over again, as it has an infinite number of times and as it will an infinite number more. Not only are you, and everyone else, granted eternal existence by God, you've already existed FOREVER.

Just need to expand your idea of what it means to be alive- to exist.

Materially, yeah. Morally, ethically, the sum of one's actions and thoughts... that's a different type of beast.

Marine1: verbaltoxin: indylaw: verbaltoxin: 0Icky0: Cloudchaser Sakonige the Red Wolf: Trying to explain faith to an unbeliever is like trying to explain a rainbow to someone who's been blind since birth. Words can't convey the feeling. It's something that has to be experienced.

Nonsense. Many unbelievers were formerly believers and remember very well what the experience was like.

That whole thing about rainbows sums up the magical thinking of the religious right there. A rainbow is light being diffused through a prism. Yes it's pretty, but it's not miraculous and you can create one with a piece of glass. To a Christian though it's God's promise not to drown us all again, so it is something amazing and miraculous, even though you can see a rainbow in a dirty puddle.

I love it when atheists explain my own religion to me. Yes, you're right - every time I see a rainbow, I think not "oh, hey, it's a rainbow," but "Praise Jesus, I'm not going to have to build a giant ship and gather a bunch of animals!" A prism would shatter my entire worldview. Please don't show me one or my head might assplode.

The rainbow is specified in the Bible to be God's promise to Noah to not destroy the Earth again. That's what Christianity teaches. Science discovered what rainbows actually are. The point here is that one believer, a Farker, professed that you can't explain to a blind person what it's like to see a rainbow, just like you can't explain what it's like to believe in God to an unbeliever. Yet that was refuted by another Farker, by pointing out the fact that atheists often are former believers. We already know what it's like to believe in God.

I made the additional point that Christian perspectives are informed by magical thinking, ergo the Bible story. It's not enough that a rainbow be a natural act. It has to be God's act as well. It's superimposed upon a perfectly normal, elegant and natural phenomenon such as a rainbow. It's not needed. It is insisted upon by religion. The rainbow c ...

If you actively believe in a supernatural anything, you are actively believing in magic, whether you call it that or not.

And let us not forget that the christian bible says there actually is magic, sorcery, talking mules, talking bushes (that burn without burning), and unicorns, et cetera.

radarlove

Cool. Well said. I agree with everything that you said.

Agent Smiths Laugh: Marine1: verbaltoxin: indylaw: verbaltoxin: 0Icky0: Cloudchaser Sakonige the Red Wolf: Trying to explain faith to an unbeliever is like trying to explain a rainbow to someone who's been blind since birth. Words can't convey the feeling. It's something that has to be experienced.

Nonsense. Many unbelievers were formerly believers and remember very well what the experience was like.

That whole thing about rainbows sums up the magical thinking of the religious right there. A rainbow is light being diffused through a prism. Yes it's pretty, but it's not miraculous and you can create one with a piece of glass. To a Christian though it's God's promise not to drown us all again, so it is something amazing and miraculous, even though you can see a rainbow in a dirty puddle.

I love it when atheists explain my own religion to me. Yes, you're right - every time I see a rainbow, I think not "oh, hey, it's a rainbow," but "Praise Jesus, I'm not going to have to build a giant ship and gather a bunch of animals!" A prism would shatter my entire worldview. Please don't show me one or my head might assplode.

The rainbow is specified in the Bible to be God's promise to Noah to not destroy the Earth again. That's what Christianity teaches. Science discovered what rainbows actually are. The point here is that one believer, a Farker, professed that you can't explain to a blind person what it's like to see a rainbow, just like you can't explain what it's like to believe in God to an unbeliever. Yet that was refuted by another Farker, by pointing out the fact that atheists often are former believers. We already know what it's like to believe in God.

I made the additional point that Christian perspectives are informed by magical thinking, ergo the Bible story. It's not enough that a rainbow be a natural act. It has to be God's act as well. It's superimposed upon a perfectly normal, elegant and natural phenomenon such as a rainbow. It's not needed. It is insisted upon by religion. The ...

And what if you ignore that stuff for the moral teachings?

Marine1: Comments like this generally make the assumption that most Christians believe that magic is on par with reality.

Most of us do not.

Then why use a book filled with magic as the basis of your teachings?
Can you at least see where the confusion comes from?
If I tell you I worship Marvel comics as the infallible word of god, it's not a stretch to then think I believe in mutants with superpowers.

Agent Smiths Laugh: What I realized what religion was once I started asking serious questions:

Allllmost... add in that his mommy and daddy only loved and rewarded him if he shoved his head in the sand, and that his continued self worth and acceptance within his family and social circles depends on keeping it shoved in there, and you've got it, at least for many American Christians.

You might need to add "and he does his best to shove everyone else's head in the sand, too" but we're getting hard to depict in photo form. ; )

gunther_bumpass: In fact, they very nearly destroyed music, you simple fark.

Ok, this one's new to me. Care to provide a citation or elaboration on your claim? I'm open to hearing all sides, and might even be able to see the perspective of someone who doesn't particularly care for the Beatles, but "they very nearly destroyed music," is a pretty substantial claim that's going to need pretty substantial support.

Millennium: Now, imagine what life would be like if you believed the other one

See, now, there's your problem. One side *can't*. One side has had their way of thinking, their emotional reward system, their neurotransmitters and creators of mood, pleasure and comfort molded, from Day One, by the self-reinforcing notions that (a) what they believe is correct, (b) the more they believe in something that has zero quantitative evidence, the better they are as a person, (c) their belief in certain myths is a valuable part of who they are, and that (d) if someone else believes something different, that other person is less valuable because they are obviously incorrect.

It's one of the reasons we have a problem in politics. One side is naturally inclined to say, "see, well, if you look at it from this other perspective..." and the other shouts, "NO! I AM RIGHT! YOU ARE WRONG! WHAT I HAVE EXPERIENCED MYSELF IS ALL I KNOW! NOTHING ELSE CAN BE!"

And it's that last bit that is, perhaps, most infuriating to someone with a more open mind. When it's *their* grandfather whose alzheimer's may benefit from stem cell research, when it's *their* wife whose life would be saved by an abortion, when it's *their* kid who is gay, well, then, "that's different" or "well, I guess I understand that specific issue now, BUT I WON'T REEVALUATE ANYTHING ELSE OR MY WORLD WILL COLLAPSE."

BarkingUnicorn: I found it helpful to start here.

Thank you very much for posting that. I appreciate you sharing it, and I will indeed read it, in its entirety.

Unfortunately, though, even it does slam into my nonsense barrier when it explains,

"Rebirth has always been an important tenet in Buddhism; and it is often referred to as walking the wheel of life (samsara). It is the process of being born over and over again in different times and different situations, possibly for many thousand times."

I think the more fundamental problem for my search is that (maybe?) ya' can't be a religion (or, maybe, even much of a philosophy?) if ya' don't require your adherents to believe in -something- that flies in the face of their objective world and, thus, creates an in-group of people who share a belief in something defying (or at least independent of) logic.

That said, I do really like the Eightfold Path (what got me reading in the first place). Be thoughtful, take care of yourself, think of others, try to do good. But, as I think about it, I guess there really does need to be an element of bullshiattery in the foundation, or else you just have "be a good person" and that's not really a -religion-, is it?

When I heard Imagine,I knew the Beatles were gone and Lennon was a solo act. That is all.

Marine1: And what if you ignore that stuff for the moral teachings?

Interesting thought to be posted while I was thinking about my position re: Buddhism.

Setting aside why one would need a specific book of fairy tales, or place one above other works of art to the point of reverence, to teach or have a sense of morality, there's a more interesting fundamental question:

If you selectively ignore the stories in the book, are you really a member of that book's religion?

If you just "ignore that stuff for the moral teachings," would you then place yourself as the functional equal to someone who believes in Rand's tripe as a guide to life, or someone who attends a Big Lebowski festival? If not, why not?

Fundamentally, functionally, does being a religion not require its adherents to believe something beyond proof -- that is, to "have faith" -- in order to be a religion?

Can one believe in the Eighfold Path, say, but think reincarnation is utter crap, and still be a Buddhist? Can one think Jesus' resurrection was an "allegory," and still be a Christian?

Pinkie Pie... You are making me crazy...
I'm in Love with you and Daisy...
So won't ya please come home!