A strange thing with the Christians' theory of what RPGs really are.

scully1 · Post by **scully1** » Wed Jul 04, 2001 9:37 am

Originally posted by dragon wench:
<STRONG>Now that's insidious Loner.....God is present within us Athiests and Agnostics, whether we like it or not. </STRONG>

Muahahaha

Aegis · Post by **Aegis** » Wed Jul 04, 2001 9:40 am

I'm not saying take away our freewill. What I am saying if he really existed, would he not try to give us divination?!

scully1 · Post by **scully1** » Wed Jul 04, 2001 9:46 am

Aegis, do you mean make us godlike? As in perfect?...

Aegis · Post by **Aegis** » Wed Jul 04, 2001 9:51 am

Not Godlike, but at least show us he exists! Maybe then people can get their acts together. I, being an Aetheisist, beleive that will never happen. You can't prove you exist, if you don't. All I'm saying is that if he were willing to get off his high and mighty cloud and come down do his own dirty work instead of doing it through the churches, maybe relgion would look more appealing, and less cult like.

scully1 · Post by **scully1** » Wed Jul 04, 2001 9:58 am

1. Proof -- But the proof is all around you. You mean to tell me that you can't look at an anatomy chart and see what a masterwork of design it is? Where's the designer? The very fact that life exists proves there is a creator. All right, all right, I know the die-hard scientists out there will ream me for that one. I just can't understand how people can look at the astounding, awesome wonder of this earth, not to mention the mind-boggling vastness of the rest of the cosmos, and say it just designed and made itself. That, to me, is just not logical.

2. Dirty Work -- We're supposed to do God's work. Feed the poor. Clothe the naked. Care for the sick. Dispel the ignorance of hatred and prejudice. Dirty work indeed. And God isn't going to just come down here and fix everything. That takes responsibility off of us, to make our world a better place. The Kingdom of God? It's supposed to be right here, right now. We're the ones who are supposed to make it happen. So it's not God who needs to get off his cloud, we're the ones who need to get of our duffs and roll up our sleeves and start behaving as if we've really been created to be something great.

[ 07-04-2001: Message edited by: loner72 ]

dragon wench · Post by **dragon wench** » Wed Jul 04, 2001 10:19 am

I can't help but wonder if many of us essentially believe the same things, it's just a question of terminology. Loner refers to God, I think of an incredibly intense cosmic energy force.....

fable · Post by **fable** » Wed Jul 04, 2001 11:11 am

KramoR writes:
Wait a minute, why would God create something. Then sit back and watch his creations kill each other. Fable. so what you are saying is the bible, isn't worth the paper it's printed. Things on family values, love your neighbor. If that was done on a daily basis, there wouldn't be any problems, would there? How far are you going back, to were people where killing in God's name?
So, if you are an atheist, why worry about other people talking about God?

@Kramor, I'm not an atheist. If you read the topic about religion that we did a few weeks back, you'll get a good idea about my decidedly non-monotheistic, but definitely noumenal views.

For the rest, I'm afraid I don't understand your question--or many there are too many of them? Let me take a brief shot at a few of 'em:

"Family values." It isn't in the bible. The OT believed explicitly that a father commanded his sons, and while wives could be loved, they were essentially owned, like any other property. There are many casual references to women being own, and treated like any other piece of merchandise. Not very family-oriented, that. And the NT, despite Christ's off-repeated Golden Rule, doesn't focus on the family. In fact, at one point Christ speaks of coming to break up the family, that what he preaches will cause families to lose their ties. He doesn't mean, of course, that he preaches discord, but that his message will surplant the message of the family as a unit. Again, that doesn't push the "family values" angle, which is essentially a 19th-century development.

"Killing in God's name." That's huge in the OT. It amazes me that people can still claim to worship the god depicted in it. I see a crazed, ranting psychopath with delusions of grandeur, who alternately kills his followers and sends them out to destroy every last man or manchild in the villages of others. (Not the women, for reasons already named. They furnished great slaves, or could be sold as such.)

It might help your understand my views if you consider that I don't confuse Christianity in any of its many forms with Christ.

KramoR · Post by **KramoR** » Wed Jul 04, 2001 11:27 am

Interesting take on that Fable, I apologize on calling you an atheist.

scully1 · Post by **scully1** » Wed Jul 04, 2001 11:43 am

Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>@
"Family values." It isn't in the bible. The OT believed explicitly that a father commanded his sons, and while wives could be loved, they were essentially owned, like any other property. There are many casual references to women being own, and treated like any other piece of merchandise. Not very family-oriented, that. And the NT, despite Christ's off-repeated Golden Rule, doesn't focus on the family. In fact, at one point Christ speaks of coming to break up the family, that what he preaches will cause families to lose their ties. He doesn't mean, of course, that he preaches discord, but that his message will surplant the message of the family as a unit.</STRONG>

1. I agree that family values as we define them isn't to be found in the OT. But, those were considered the best values in that place/time/social circumstances/etc. etc. Things have changed. If someone from back then saw what we call family values today they'd be positively shocked. Of course we think we're the ones who got it right...but one has to consider cultural influence for what was considered right and proper.

2. I don't think Christ meant that his teachings would supplant the message of the family as a unit. I think what he meant was, that some members of a family would believe in him and some would not, naturally causing discord. This was written in a climate in which indeed family members were turning each other over to the authorities when a persecution of Christians hit the area...

Yshania · Post by **Yshania** » Wed Jul 04, 2001 11:56 am

Originally posted by Fable

"Killing in God's name." That's huge in the OT. It amazes me that people can still claim to worship the god depicted in it. I see a crazed, ranting psychopath with delusions of grandeur, who alternately kills his followers and sends them out to destroy every last man or manchild in the villages of others. (Not the women, for reasons already named. They furnished great slaves, or could be sold as such.)

Does it not come down to the masses wanting a personification of their 'God' and relying on the wisdom of that 'prophet' to translate their holy book honestly?

This makes me think of two things, one serious and one funny.

The serious one is a middle eastern despot persuading his followers that the faith approved of them sending their eight year old children to clear mine fields to avoid the deaths of their valued soldiers...

The funny one is a scene from Monty Python's Life of Brian where the masses are gathering below Brian's window. Bryan yells at them that they do not need to follow - that they are all individuals and one man holds up his hand and says "I'm not!"

fable · Post by **fable** » Wed Jul 04, 2001 2:01 pm

Loner writes:
I agree that family values as we define them isn't to be found in the OT. But, those were considered the best values in that place/time/social circumstances/etc. etc. Things have changed. If someone from back then saw what we call family values today they'd be positively shocked. Of course we think we're the ones who got it right...but one has to consider cultural influence for what was considered right and proper.

@Loner, with respect, what comparisons can we run with other nomadic tribes of the same era? All we can say for certain is that this is what the Jews of the biblical period did, this is how they lived, for better or worse; and that by our standards, it was pretty appalling. I don't think it's possible to say it was "good" by comparison with its known contemporaries. It was a heavily patriarchal, stratified, eye-for-eye society that gloried in coming upon largely undefended agrarian communities, and destroying them--a sort of Huns of the desert, in at least one or two respects.

The bible, here, is a very good recordkeeper, because the ancient Jews took joy in these activities dictated by their God, and reported them with pride.

I don't think Christ meant that his teachings would supplant the message of the family as a unit. I think what he meant was, that some members of a family would believe in him and some would not, naturally causing discord.

I think we're essentially in agreement, here, and you just expressed it better than I did.

That said, it does provide a prime example that the message of "family values" is a cultural add-on to the bible, for better or worse, and historically one of the most recent.

fable · Post by **fable** » Wed Jul 04, 2001 2:06 pm

Yshania writes:
Does it not come down to the masses wanting a personification of their 'God' and relying on the wisdom of that 'prophet' to translate their holy book honestly?

Pretty much so, though I separate out cultural and folk religion from religion as a tool to grasp an essentially nonlogical, intuitive series of truths.

The serious one is a middle eastern despot persuading his followers that the faith approved of them sending their eight year old children to clear mine fields to avoid the deaths of their valued soldiers.

The atrocities committed in the name of religion throughout the world are profound. The gods must have either infinite patience, or the strangest senses of humor.

The funny one is a scene from Monty Python's Life of Brian where the masses are gathering below Brian's window. Bryan yells at them that they do not need to follow - that they are all individuals and one man holds up his hand and says "I'm not!"

Yes! A great film--and that was a cameo appearance (and bit of humor) by Spike Milligan, a very, very funny man. Milligan was the brains behind the 50's radio comedy hit, The Goon Show, which also brought fame to the late Harry Secombe and Peter Sellers. It ran for about a decade, and provided a profound influence on Monty Python (as they themselves admit).

RPGeek · Post by **RPGeek** » Wed Jul 04, 2001 2:41 pm

Never expected so many replies in one day. Anyway...
I live closer to GB than you! That's where Monty Python comes from! Bleeeh!

Perhaps surprisingly, I am actually a Christian, and believe in "free will". All I really wanted to do was to whip cream, spill it up on them conservatives, pour smelly cacao on their heads, and make them watch TV. That's because I'm a Christian, and don't resort to violence. Sort of. Well, that, and because I wrote this on a short notice and can't think of anything funny to say.

Wait a minute, why would God create something. Then sit back and watch his creations kill each other, Fable.

To me, that's not the big question.
The big question is why he created something at all. I have always pondered on that. Thus, I daresay that God is not almighty (that's the theory of the author of Sophie's World), or even that He created us to kill Himself (that's the theory of the author of this topic, and also this post. I call him "me").

[ 07-04-2001: Message edited by: RPgeek ]

fable · Post by **fable** » Wed Jul 04, 2001 2:47 pm

There's an old Kaballistic saying that the worlds of existence and sensation are the exhalation of God. When God inhales, all of creation is drawn back into itself, in preparation for the next mighty event.

That also tallies with a Hindu view that sees creation as a series of ages caused by the breath of the Supreme God.

Doesn't make it right or wrong, but interesting. It certainly does put things in a certain kind of perspective.

dragon wench · Post by **dragon wench** » Wed Jul 04, 2001 2:48 pm

"All I really wanted to do was to whip cream",

If that's what you like I'm sure that the Order of the Dark Flame could find a home for you.

scully1 · Post by **scully1** » Wed Jul 04, 2001 3:09 pm

Hmm, yes, we don't have any more slaves, do we?...

dragon wench · Post by **dragon wench** » Wed Jul 04, 2001 3:14 pm

@Loner, my thoughts exactly....Maybe we should dedicate a new thread to auditions......

Yshania · Post by **Yshania** » Wed Jul 04, 2001 3:18 pm

@Fable - lol - I am familiar with Spike Milligan. He is indeed a very funny man and an expert on cameo appearances. Though always senile he has become dangerously unstable in old age!....his unpredictability makes him all the funnier

Nippy · Post by **Nippy** » Wed Jul 04, 2001 3:19 pm

I have a view that there is no God as such but a controlling influence. I think we were made but where did we develop our emotions etc, granted they are caused by hormones etc who designed the brain to do this apart from evolution. Some of you may call me a druid but I do believe that there is a balance in this world, one life is created another dies. It is all a cycle in my POV.

Georgi · Post by **Georgi** » Wed Jul 04, 2001 3:21 pm

@Yshania I have to agree, Spike Milligan is hilarious