Homeboy was ripped.
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.123rf.com%2F400wm%2F400%2F400%2Fzatletic%2Fzatletic1002%2Fzatletic100200007%2F6350604-jesus-crucified-on-the-cross.jpg&hash=5c27203dcb73c1c0da35f9cba5ff2106ca859aea)
Discuss Jesus' diet and training routine. Sit-ups and crunches were definitely being done given the six-pack. Probably lean meats, veggies and a sh*tload of cardio.
I think the artists fantasies had more to do with it than any amount of cardio.
How is that anatomy even possible?? You can't be starved/malnourished and have muscular abdomen...
As an artist, i shake my head.
Quote from: BooksCatsEtcI think the artists fantasies had more to do with it than any amount of cardio.
I'd bet that's right.
I don't find Dude's emaciated form to be all that attractive.
I don't see a six pack, just protruding ribs.
Well, there's also the fact that he looks totally caucasian.
He doesn't look ripped to me, just super skinny.
That's just odd. it is insanely toned but starved, I'm no expert but don't the muscles have to deteriorate before that type of starvation happens to the skin.
Quote from: The Magic Pudding on June 24, 2012, 03:14:08 PM
I don't see a six pack, just protruding ribs.
No protruding ribs there. The rib muscles are keeping them tight against the stomach. i.e. if they were protruding the ribs would jut out further than the abdominal muscles and would also be visible through the pectorals.
I see he shaved under his arms.
I'd far rather have a picture of Budha's fat smiling face on my wall than a dead or dying skinny guy.
Christian's are morbid.
Quote from: Stevil on June 24, 2012, 08:17:32 PM
I'd far rather have a picture of Budha's fat smiling face on my wall than a dead or dying skinny guy.
Christian's are morbid.
A gross (pardon the pun) generalization. Many Christians don't have any need of looking at pictures or statues that they know don't represent the real thing, anyway. Furthermore, Protestants generally refrain from depicting Jesus on the cross in their art, and focus on Jesus alive, either pre-crucifixion or post-resurrection. But, like Catholics, when they do depict him artistically, they usually make him in their image.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on June 24, 2012, 08:53:43 PM
Quote from: Stevil on June 24, 2012, 08:17:32 PM
I'd far rather have a picture of Budha's fat smiling face on my wall than a dead or dying skinny guy.
Christian's are morbid.
A gross (pardon the pun) generalization. Many Christians don't have any need of looking at pictures or statues that they know don't represent the real thing, anyway. Furthermore, Protestants generally refrain from depicting Jesus on the cross in their art, and focus on Jesus alive, either pre-crucifixion or post-resurrection. But, like Catholics, when they do depict him artistically, they usually make him in their image.
OK, fair enough, Catholics are morbid. They like to imagine eating Jesus flesh, drinking his blood. The love the look of him dying on a cross. They make soapified remains into Saints, gives me the creeps.
But surly most Christians love that Jesus died (for their sins). Bring that guy over here, give me some wood and nails (and a hammer) and absolve ourselves!
I've never seen a Chinese, Mexican, African or gay Jesus. Whose image is he really being made in?
Quote from: Stevil on June 24, 2012, 09:02:16 PM
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on June 24, 2012, 08:53:43 PM
Quote from: Stevil on June 24, 2012, 08:17:32 PM
I'd far rather have a picture of Budha's fat smiling face on my wall than a dead or dying skinny guy.
Christian's are morbid.
A gross (pardon the pun) generalization. Many Christians don't have any need of looking at pictures or statues that they know don't represent the real thing, anyway. Furthermore, Protestants generally refrain from depicting Jesus on the cross in their art, and focus on Jesus alive, either pre-crucifixion or post-resurrection. But, like Catholics, when they do depict him artistically, they usually make him in their image.
OK, fair enough, Catholics are morbid. They like to imagine eating Jesus flesh, drinking his blood. The love the look of him dying on a cross. They make soapified remains into Saints, gives me the creeps.
But surly most Christians love that Jesus died (for their sins). Bring that guy over here, give me some wood and nails (and a hammer) and absolve ourselves!
I've never seen a Chinese, Mexican, African or gay Jesus. Whose image is he really being made in?
I must say I find the jeering tone of the contributions here mildly disturbing. I regard Christians as profoundly mistaken, but I feel no urge to trample on their sensitivities or to ridicule Catholics as some species of necrophiliacs. Like it or not, many Christians are otherwise rational people, some of them with greater generosity of spirit and tolerance than I've seen displayed so far on this thread. And of course,I accept that some Christians, particularly those of an evangelical bent, discriminate against and vilify atheists. Returning the compliment only plays to their agenda.
Quote from: Crow on June 24, 2012, 03:34:32 PM
That's just odd. it is insanely toned but starved, I'm no expert but don't the muscles have to deteriorate before that type of starvation happens to the skin.
That may be true of mere mortals but this is the son of god so the rules don't apply. A starved, dying Jesus who can still pull off a six-pack is just how god rolls.
Quote from: En_Route on June 24, 2012, 09:40:12 PM
I must say I find the jeering tone of the contributions here mildly disturbing. I regard Christians as profoundly mistaken, but I feel no urge to trample on their sensitivities or to ridicule Catholics as some species of necrophiliacs. Like it or not, many Christians are otherwise rational people, some of them with greater generosity of spirit and tolerance than I've seen displayed so far on this thread. And of course,I accept that some Christians, particularly those of an evangelical bent, discriminate against and vilify atheists. Returning the compliment only plays to their agenda.
Let's not get stuck on evangelical bent, extremists.
The normal, average day Catholic is taught to believe at Eucharist they are eating Jesus flesh, this is what they believe, don't they?
Or are they just giving lip service to their church? The one they are taught to believe is infallible.
The normal, average day Christian is taught to accept the death of their Jesus as absolution for their own sins.
I don't know how to accept that otherwise sane, intelligent people can hold these positions.
Quote from: Stevil on June 24, 2012, 09:02:16 PM
I've never seen a Chinese, Mexican, African or gay Jesus. Whose image is he really being made in?
Google images will show you the light, not many Chinese Jesus but loads of the other examples.
Quote from: Stevil on June 24, 2012, 10:01:36 PM
Quote from: En_Route on June 24, 2012, 09:40:12 PM
I must say I find the jeering tone of the contributions here mildly disturbing. I regard Christians as profoundly mistaken, but I feel no urge to trample on their sensitivities or to ridicule Catholics as some species of necrophiliacs. Like it or not, many Christians are otherwise rational people, some of them with greater generosity of spirit and tolerance than I've seen displayed so far on this thread. And of course,I accept that some Christians, particularly those of an evangelical bent, discriminate against and vilify atheists. Returning the compliment only plays to their agenda.
Let's not get stuck on evangelical bent, extremists.
The normal, average day Catholic is taught to believe at Eucharist they are eating Jesus flesh, this is what they believe, don't they?
Or are they just giving lip service to their church? The one they are taught to believe is infallible.
The normal, average day Christian is taught to accept the death of their Jesus as absolution for their own sins.
I don't know how to accept that otherwise sane, intelligent people can hold these positions.
It's not that difficult to explain. I don't believe a smart guy like you can't work it out.
And to say that that Transibstantiation implies some for of cannibalism is a crude caricature of Catholic dogma.
Quote from: En_Route on June 24, 2012, 10:28:18 PM
Quote from: Stevil on June 24, 2012, 10:01:36 PM
Quote from: En_Route on June 24, 2012, 09:40:12 PM
I must say I find the jeering tone of the contributions here mildly disturbing. I regard Christians as profoundly mistaken, but I feel no urge to trample on their sensitivities or to ridicule Catholics as some species of necrophiliacs. Like it or not, many Christians are otherwise rational people, some of them with greater generosity of spirit and tolerance than I've seen displayed so far on this thread. And of course,I accept that some Christians, particularly those of an evangelical bent, discriminate against and vilify atheists. Returning the compliment only plays to their agenda.
Let's not get stuck on evangelical bent, extremists.
The normal, average day Catholic is taught to believe at Eucharist they are eating Jesus flesh, this is what they believe, don't they?
Or are they just giving lip service to their church? The one they are taught to believe is infallible.
The normal, average day Christian is taught to accept the death of their Jesus as absolution for their own sins.
I don't know how to accept that otherwise sane, intelligent people can hold these positions.
It's not that difficult to explain. I don't believe a smart guy like you can't work it out.
And to say that that Transubtantiation implies some for of cannibalism is a crude caricature of Catholic dogma.
If it's literally true that the consecrated communion wafer is the body of Jesus (the Catholics say that it is), and Jesus is a living human (all of Christianity believes that Jesus is alive right now, even if he's only physically on the earth during the communion ceremony), then the communion ceremony is ritualized cannibalism. This is simply the fact of the matter. One can decry those who ridicule this bizarre belief, and even say that stripping away the mystical malarkey which surrounds the Catholic communion and calling it by its real name is "crude," but it is what it is.
Quote from: Stevil on June 24, 2012, 09:02:16 PM
I've never seen a Chinese, Mexican, African or gay Jesus. Whose image is he really being made in?
I've seen Hispanic and black Jesuses (sp?). Every culture that adopts him eventually assimilates him into their ethos. He's highly assimilable and digestible. What would a gay Jesus look like, anyway?
Quote from: Recusant on June 24, 2012, 10:49:51 PM
If it's literally true that the consecrated communion wafer is the body of Jesus (the Catholics say that it is), and Jesus is a living human (all of Christianity believes that Jesus is alive right now, even if he's only physically on the earth during the communion ceremony), then the communion ceremony is ritualized cannibalism. This is simply the fact of the matter. One can decry those who ridicule this bizarre belief, and even say that stripping away the mystical malarkey which surrounds the Catholic communion and calling it by its real name is "crude," but it is what it is.
If the ritual does not include a belief that the bread and wine literally become the body and blood, but are symbols infused with special meaning, then it's not cannibalism. It's eating bread and drinking wine, not much different than drinking a toast to a very good friend. It doesn't need to be taken to the extreme. Moderation is the key.
Quote from: En_Route on June 24, 2012, 10:28:18 PM
It's not that difficult to explain. I don't believe a smart guy like you can't work it out.
And to say that that Transibstantiation implies some for of cannibalism is a crude caricature of Catholic dogma.
I've never been a theist, I really do struggle when trying to understand some of this stuff.
Transubstantiation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transubstantiation)
Quote
The earliest known use of the term "transubstantiation" to describe the change from bread and wine to body and blood of Christ that was believed to occur in the Eucharist was by Hildebert de Lavardin, Archbishop of Tours (died 1133), in the eleventh century and by the end of the twelfth century the term was in widespread use.[5] The Fourth Council of the Lateran, which convened beginning November 11, 1215,[6] spoke of the bread and wine as "transubstantiated" into the body and blood of Christ: "His body and blood are truly contained in the sacrament of the altar under the forms of bread and wine, the bread and wine having been transubstantiated, by God's power, into his body and blood".
It just sounds disgusting to me. I wouldn't eat the bread or wine if I believed it transubstantiated into Jesus' body and blood. Eucharist would be a time for me to Fast.
At least the Potestants aren't into it
Quote
During the Protestant Reformation, the doctrine of transubstantiation was heavily criticised as an Aristotelian "pseudo-philosophy"[8] imported into Christian teaching and jettisoned in favor of Martin Luther's doctrine of sacramental union, or in favor, per Huldrych Zwingli, of the Eucharist as memorial
Quote from: Recusant on June 24, 2012, 10:49:51 PM
If it's literally true that the consecrated communion wafer is the body of Jesus (the Catholics say that it is), and Jesus is a living human (all of Christianity believes that Jesus is alive right now, even if he's only physically on the earth during the communion ceremony), then the communion ceremony is ritualized cannibalism. This is simply the fact of the matter. One can decry those who ridicule this bizarre belief, and even say that stripping away the mystical malarkey which surrounds the Catholic communion and calling it by its real name is "crude," but it is what it is.
Well of course as no bodies are harmed in the communion process, as an issue of fact, it is not cannibalism of any variety, ritualised or otherwise. Further,Catholics accept, as they must, there is no change in the physical properties of the communion bread, so they don't even mistakenly believe they are engaged in cannibalism. The bread is transformed into the very essence of Jesus, his whole being, including his soul and divine nature.
Of course it makes no sense at a rational level. Mystical mumbo- jumbo it is, but to reduce the concept to a cartoon version where Catholics think they are sinking their fangs into a Jesusburger does the atheist cause a serious disservice. It makes its proponents look as ignorant, hysterical and bigoted as any evangelical,redneck.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on June 24, 2012, 10:55:31 PMIf the ritual does not include a belief that the bread and wine literally become the body and blood, but are symbols infused with special meaning, then it's not cannibalism. It's eating bread and drinking wine, not much different than drinking a toast to a very good friend. It doesn't need to be taken to the extreme. Moderation is the key.
I see that
Stevil has been quicker than I, but I'll post anyway.
The Catholics insist that the wafer and the wine do
literally change to the actual flesh and blood of Christ. See the Catholic Encyclopedia article on "The Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist" (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05573a.htm#section1).
QuoteFirst of all the whole structure of the discourse of promise demands a literal interpretation of the words: "eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood".
and,
Quote. . . according to the purpose of the Almighty, the substance of the bread and wine departs in order to make room for the Body and Blood of Christ.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on June 24, 2012, 10:50:21 PM
Quote from: Stevil on June 24, 2012, 09:02:16 PM
I've never seen a Chinese, Mexican, African or gay Jesus. Whose image is he really being made in?
I've seen Hispanic and black Jesuses (sp?). Every culture that adopts him eventually assimilates him into their ethos. He's highly assimilable and digestible. What would a gay Jesus look like, anyway?
OK, I've just always seen a white Jesus, when I've always thought he would have been middle eastern as I don't think there was much world travel at that time.
A gay Jesus, LOL, I don't know, most gays I know look no different to non gays. But maybe Jesus was the flamboyant type. He didn't get married did he? Given how popular he was, one can only draw conclusions.
BTW Just kidding, always good for a laugh to suggest Jesus was gay. Christians will take it as a horrible insult of course, given their stance on homosexuality. In my opinion, if he was gay, it would be no big deal.
Quote from: En_Route on June 24, 2012, 11:06:20 PM
Well of course as no bodies are harmed in the communion process, as an issue of fact, it is not cannibalism of any variety, ritualised or otherwise.
If you refuse to believe that the Catholics actually profess to believe that they are in actual fact eating the body of Jesus, for whatever reason, I don't care. They're the ones making the absurd claim, not I. If taking them at their word makes me "ignorant, hysterical and bigoted," then so be it. I stand by my characterization (
not caricature) as completely accurate.
Quote from: Recusant on June 24, 2012, 11:06:57 PMThe Catholics insist that the wafer and the wine do literally change to the actual flesh and blood of Christ. See the Catholic Encyclopedia article on "The Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist" (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05573a.htm#section1).
Correct. I was raised Roman Catholic and this is what I was taught as a boy. It never occurred to me at that time what a completely f**ked up idea this is. Just another reason I left all this superstitious horsesh*t behind.
Quote from: Recusant on June 24, 2012, 11:15:44 PM
Quote from: En_Route on June 24, 2012, 11:06:20 PM
Well of course as no bodies are harmed in the communion process, as an issue of fact, it is not cannibalism of any variety, ritualised or otherwise.
If you refuse to believe that the Catholics actually profess to believe that they are in actual fact eating the body of Jesus, for whatever reason, I don't care. They're the ones making the absurd claim, not I. If taking them at their word makes me "ignorant, hysterical and bigoted," then so be it. I stand by my characterization (not caricature) as completely accurate.
Well if you seriously want to maintain that Catholics believe that they are literally engaged in a form of cannibalism, that is your privilege. Just don't expect anybody to take you seriously.
As somebody who spent many years being schooled by Catholics in their dogma, it doesn't matter to me whether you or anybody else takes me seriously when I write about the crap that they teach: I know what I was taught, and it can be verified by reading the article I linked to earlier.
Quote from: En_Route on June 24, 2012, 11:21:36 PMWell if you seriously want to maintain that Catholics believe that they are literally engaged in a form of cannibalism, that is your privilege. Just don't expect anybody to take you seriously.
It isn't presented as or perceived as cannibalism because you're just eating bread and drinking wine. The claim that it becomes the body and blood is a spiritual con job to make the whole ritual seem meaningful and miraculous. Another church may present it as a symbolic uniting of man and god. Point being, if you're raised with this shit and it's presented as a pure and divine means of bringing you closer to god, no one will see it as anything but beautiful no matter how it's offered.
Arguing whether one church claims it's a symbolic ritual or another claims it literally becomes the flesh and blood of Christ is like arguing which side of a dead fish stinks worse. It's ALL ridiculous.
Quote from: Recusant on June 24, 2012, 11:28:16 PM
As somebody who spent many years being schooled by Catholics in their dogma, it doesn't matter to me whether you or anybody else takes me seriously when I write about the crap that they teach: I know what I was taught, and it can be verified by reading the article I linked to earlier.
Then you'd know that the body in question is resurrected and will live forever and is along with the soul and divinity of Jesus present in every communion host ie this is a body that rose from the dead, is immortal but the essence of which ihas been incorporated in its entirety into billions of such hosts. So to equate this incomprehensible concept with anything in the real world really makes no sense. Some cranks do peddle this line about cannibalism, but they are an embarrassment to themselves and the cause of atheism.
Quote from: MadBomr101 on June 24, 2012, 11:37:31 PM
Quote from: En_Route on June 24, 2012, 11:21:36 PMWell if you seriously want to maintain that Catholics believe that they are literally engaged in a form of cannibalism, that is your privilege. Just don't expect anybody to take you seriously.
It isn't presented as or perceived as cannibalism because you're just eating bread and drinking wine. The claim that it becomes the body and blood is a spiritual con job to make the whole ritual seem meaningful and miraculous. Another church may present it as a symbolic uniting of man and god. Point being, if you're raised with this shit and it's presented as a pure and divine means of bringing you closer to god, no one will see it as anything but beautiful no matter how it's offered.
Arguing whether one church claims it's a symbolic ritual or another claims it literally becomes the flesh and blood of Christ is like arguing which side of a dead fish stinks worse. It's ALL ridiculous.
I completely agree. But I think if we are going to put forward atheistic positions, it would help if they were not equally ridiculous.
Mock the Jesus cracker and see what happens. If they didn't see that as more than just a biscuit, then there really would be no reason to get all worked up over it.
Sorry, but some things really are ridiculous, whether they have many years of tradition and followers or not. Always walking that fine line between making fun of people and making fun of their cherished beliefs (how separable are they?) but some things just have to be said.
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on June 24, 2012, 11:42:17 PM
Mock the Jesus cracker and see what happens. If they didn't see that as more than just a biscuit, then there really would be no reason to get all worked up over it.
Sorry, but some things really are ridiculous, whether they have many years of tradition and followers or not. Always walking that fine line between making fun of people and making fun of their cherished beliefs (how separable are they?) but some things just have to be said.
People do hold many irrational beliefs which are dear to them. That's what it is to be human. Even some atheists regard certain propositions as self- evident or intuitively right , which on analysis turn out to be acts of faith. Christians on the whole have a deplorable record in extending tolerance and empathy to atheists; personally, I don't feel compelled to reciprocate.
I'm just trying to understand the mind of a believer.
They tell me their bread and wine becomes Jesus' body and blood when they eat it.
I say Ewwww Yuck!
They say it is not cannibalism.
I ask why not?
They come up with words like "transubstantiation"
I find out that means it is body and blood, but it looks like bread and wine.
If I have a vegetarian sausage that looks like a pork sausage, am I eating pork or vegetables? The answer is vegetables.
So it is irrelevant what it looks like.
Thus they believe they are eating body and blood.
So, again why is this not cannibalism?
Because it is everlasting body and blood, because it is resurrected body and blood?
Hmmm, whatever qualifiers you put on it, it is still believed to be body and blood.
Sounds disgusting to me, eating the flesh of your beloved savior.
Is this not gross?
Nah, its a beautiful experience they say.
Hmmm, am I supposed to coexist with these people?
I have no trouble coexisting with Catholics. In fact I prefer them generally to the evangelicals and most Baptists, for instance. As well, I don't mind having it implied that I'm an embarrassing crank who is ignorant, hysterical and bigoted for calling their beliefs as I see them. (https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg826.imageshack.us%2Fimg826%2F4195%2Flolbymissbangles.gif&hash=a459a670b2fef67538964246ce892a4b5f7d96e2)
Quote from: Stevil on June 25, 2012, 12:09:37 AM
I'm just trying to understand the mind of a believer.
They tell me their bread and wine becomes Jesus' body and blood when they eat it.
I say Ewwww Yuck!
They say it is not cannibalism.
I ask why not?
They come up with words like "transubstantiation"
I find out that means it is body and blood, but it looks like bread and wine.
If I have a vegetarian sausage that looks like a pork sausage, am I eating pork or vegetables? The answer is vegetables.
So it is irrelevant what it looks like.
Thus they believe they are eating body and blood.
So, again why is this not cannibalism?
Because it is everlasting body and blood, because it is resurrected body and blood?
Hmmm, whatever qualifiers you put on it, it is still believed to be body and blood.
Sounds disgusting to me, eating the flesh of your beloved savior.
Is this not gross?
Nah, its a beautiful experience they say.
Hmmm, am I supposed to coexist with these people?
Not body and blood as we know it, but supernatural body and blood, and moreover supernatural body and blood which has all the physical characteristics of bread. So cannibalism, real or putative, it ain't. So it's not gross but it is über- bizarre, or less diplomatically, nuts. But because it is accepted by vast numbers of ordinary , functioniing people we know If we didn't know already that sane people can believe insane things.
Quote from: Recusant on June 25, 2012, 12:17:18 AM
I have no trouble coexisting with Catholics. In fact I prefer them generally to the evangelicals and most Baptists, for instance. As well, I don't mind having it implied that I'm an embarrassing crank who is ignorant, hysterical and bigoted for calling their beliefs as I see them. (https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg826.imageshack.us%2Fimg826%2F4195%2Flolbymissbangles.gif&hash=a459a670b2fef67538964246ce892a4b5f7d96e2)
I know you are made of hardy stuff.
Quote from: Stevil on June 25, 2012, 12:09:37 AM
I'm just trying to understand the mind of a believer.
They tell me their bread and wine becomes Jesus' body and blood when they eat it.
I say Ewwww Yuck!
They say it is not cannibalism.
I ask why not?
They come up with words like "transubstantiation"
I find out that means it is body and blood, but it looks like bread and wine.
If I have a vegetarian sausage that looks like a pork sausage, am I eating pork or vegetables? The answer is vegetables.
So it is irrelevant what it looks like.
Thus they believe they are eating body and blood.
So, again why is this not cannibalism?
Because it is everlasting body and blood, because it is resurrected body and blood?
Hmmm, whatever qualifiers you put on it, it is still believed to be body and blood.
Sounds disgusting to me, eating the flesh of your beloved savior.
Is this not gross?
Nah, its a beautiful experience they say.
Hmmm, am I supposed to coexist with these people?
As a recovered Catholic I can only repeat what I said earlier; if you're raised with this shit and it's presented to you as a spiritual uniting with christ, you eat the little cookie, you drink the cheap wine and you feel all one with god. It's actually gross and retarded but it's made beautiful by the years of brainwashing that packages it as thing of beauty.
Quote from: MadBomr101 on June 25, 2012, 12:23:28 AM
Quote from: Stevil on June 25, 2012, 12:09:37 AM
I'm just trying to understand the mind of a believer.
They tell me their bread and wine becomes Jesus' body and blood when they eat it.
I say Ewwww Yuck!
They say it is not cannibalism.
I ask why not?
They come up with words like "transubstantiation"
I find out that means it is body and blood, but it looks like bread and wine.
If I have a vegetarian sausage that looks like a pork sausage, am I eating pork or vegetables? The answer is vegetables.
So it is irrelevant what it looks like.
Thus they believe they are eating body and blood.
So, again why is this not cannibalism?
Because it is everlasting body and blood, because it is resurrected body and blood?
Hmmm, whatever qualifiers you put on it, it is still believed to be body and blood.
Sounds disgusting to me, eating the flesh of your beloved savior.
Is this not gross?
Nah, its a beautiful experience they say.
Hmmm, am I supposed to coexist with these people?
As a recovered Catholic I can only repeat what I said earlier; if you're raised with this shit and it's presented to you as a spiritual uniting with christ, you eat the little cookie, you drink the cheap wine and you feel all one with god. It's actually gross and retarded but it's made beautiful by the years of brainwashing that packages it as thing of beauty.
It is rather primitive but the theology around it has a poetic quality to it, albeit with no correspondence to any form of known human logic.
Quote from: En_Route on June 24, 2012, 11:47:58 PM
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on June 24, 2012, 11:42:17 PM
Mock the Jesus cracker and see what happens. If they didn't see that as more than just a biscuit, then there really would be no reason to get all worked up over it.
Sorry, but some things really are ridiculous, whether they have many years of tradition and followers or not. Always walking that fine line between making fun of people and making fun of their cherished beliefs (how separable are they?) but some things just have to be said.
People do hold many irrational beliefs which are dear to them. That's what it is to be human. Even some atheists regard certain propositions as self- evident or intuitively right , which on analysis turn out to be acts of faith. Christians on the whole have a deplorable record in extending tolerance and empathy to atheists; personally, I don't feel compelled to reciprocate.
I'm wholly aware that even atheists hold cherished beliefs and ideologies that they will defend from any challenge. I'm from a place riddled with politicians, some of which are also atheists. ::)
But if one of those tried to pass a law which dictated that people should live their lives or restrict your freedom as they see fit based on tradition of their beliefs, no matter how cherished, you'd bet I'd wouldn't extend any feelings of empathy towards them. Sometimes those things outweigh the disgust I feel of some people's actions and desire to not be associated with them in any way.
Quote from: Stevil on June 25, 2012, 12:09:37 AM
Hmmm, whatever qualifiers you put on it, it is still believed to be body and blood.
Sounds disgusting to me, eating the flesh of your beloved savior.
Is this not gross?
Nah, its a beautiful experience they say.
Hmmm, am I supposed to coexist with these people?
I laughed at this :D
Based on what the native Indians did here, by literally eating their enemies and turning it into a somewhat spiritual/traditional experience, I'd say that people's mind can work in strange ways.
basically if one of them wanted to eat you, it was a compliment, as they wanted to incorporate your traits. To me it looks like of similar to what Catholics do on some level.
Quote from: Recusant on June 25, 2012, 12:17:18 AM
I have no trouble coexisting with Catholics. In fact I prefer them generally to the evangelicals and most Baptists, for instance. As well, I don't mind having it implied that I'm an embarrassing crank who is ignorant, hysterical and bigoted for calling their beliefs as I see them. (https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg826.imageshack.us%2Fimg826%2F4195%2Flolbymissbangles.gif&hash=a459a670b2fef67538964246ce892a4b5f7d96e2)
The problem I have with Catholics (oh no, here we go), is that it is very inflexible, they are strongly against gay marriage, against euthanasia, against sex education, against birth control, against STD protection (condoms), against women in certain jobs/roles etc. If they had their way society would be pretty terrible. They must be opposed on these items.
But in saying that, my wife's friend's husband is a Catholic and he is a pretty non political, non judgmental person (well, he seems that way)
My neighbor is devout Orthodox, has a picture of Mary on is front door and almost a shrine in the entrance way of his house, his car has a dangling cross and pictures of Mary and Jesus. But he seems OK. He asked me if I was Catholic, I told him I wasn't religious at all. He didn't try to evangalise me.
Anyway, even these nice people still have these strong beliefs, even if they only enforce it on their own family. I'm just trying to understand it.
I don't see the cannibalism as a threat because it seems they only eat the bread and drink the wine (not actually people's flesh) regardless of what they are imagining at the time. It just seems very odd to me. These are normal people right? But imagining eating Jesus flesh.
Quote from: Stevil on June 25, 2012, 12:31:52 AMThe problem I have with Catholics (oh no, here we go), is that it is very inflexible, they are strongly against gay marriage, against euthanasia, against sex education, against birth control, against STD protection (condoms), against women in certain jobs/roles etc. If they had their way society would be pretty terrible.
There are many Catholics, at least in the US, who do not agree with all of the dictates of the church hierarchy. This includes some in the religious vocation, as can be seen in the recent noises from the Vatican about US nuns.
Can I just say I love how this thread has grown from my initially jokey post about Jesus' Speedo physique on the cross nto an actual, intelligent exchange of opinions and ideas on complex religious topics. Despite my best attempts to dumb things down this thread has evolved into a higher form.
I'm not sure which post was the transitional one but proof of evolution right here kids. For my next topic, I will start a thread discussing flatulence among the apostles and conclude by confirming proof of the big bang.
It was Stevil's fault, who for some reason can't stop thinking about people eating Jesus :D
;)
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on June 25, 2012, 05:23:06 AM
It was Stevil's fault, who for some reason can't stop thinking about people eating Jesus :D
;)
I blame Hildebert de Lavardin for coming up with the idea of transubstantiation, which is simply mental gymnastics, to try and make sense of something nonsensical in the bible.
I also blame the other people around him that thought it was a great idea and integrated it into Catholic teaching.
I also must blame the followers whom apparently will believe anything that they are told by their church. Yup, its Jesus body, it just looks and tastes like bread. Scientific tests will show that it is ordinary bread. But actually it is Jesus body, you are supposed to eat it, Jesus wants you to eat it. Its a privilege, its the Catholic thing to do. Num num!
But to blame me, Stevil, I'm as innocent (pure) as the driven snow.
Quote from: Stevil on June 25, 2012, 06:20:56 AMYup, its Jesus body, it just looks and tastes like bread.
Just an FYI to anyone who's never had the opportunity to enjoy the amazing taste treat that is the holy eucharist, it tastes like nothing at all. It has absolutely no flavor and simply dissolves on your tongue. I once asked the priest if they had any garlic flavored eucharist and I had to say seven hail mary's and a lord's prayer as penance.
Quote from: MadBomr101 on June 25, 2012, 06:56:45 AM
Quote from: Stevil on June 25, 2012, 06:20:56 AMYup, its Jesus body, it just looks and tastes like bread.
Just an FYI to anyone who's never had the opportunity to enjoy the amazing taste treat that is the holy eucharist, it tastes like nothing at all. It has absolutely no flavor and simply dissolves on your tongue. I once asked the priest if they had any garlic flavored eucharist and I had to say seven hail mary's and a lord's prayer as penance.
I know the taste all too well.
I was raised catholic and was even an alter boy in my youth. Once, before a service, a fellow alter boy and myself decided to get drunk off of the blood of Jesus (which by the way comes in a box). Then we proceeded to cram as many jesus wafers as we could into our mouths. This was my first time getting drunk.
Blood of Christ ha? Sometimes red wine makes me grumpy does Jesus offer white wine? Oh no forget that I don't want to think about what that might represent. Then again perhaps the Catholics wouldn't mind giving an atheist white wine.
Quote from: Genericguy on June 25, 2012, 08:18:43 AMI was raised catholic and was even an alter boy in my youth. Once, before a service, a fellow alter boy and myself decided to get drunk off of the blood of Jesus (which by the way comes in a box). Then we proceeded to cram as many jesus wafers as we could into our mouths. This was my first time getting drunk.
I did the altar boy thing as well, for two years. I never got drunk on the sacramental wine but I did frequently raid the priest's refrigerator in the rectory. Those clowns lived very nicely and the woman who did all the cooking for the clergy made the best food. The body of christ may have been tasteless but her meatloaf, pasta, and chicken was heavenly.
Quote from: The Magic Pudding on June 25, 2012, 11:01:37 AM
Blood of Christ ha? Sometimes red wine makes me grumpy does Jesus offer white wine? Oh no forget that I don't want to think about what that might represent. Then again perhaps the Catholics wouldn't mind giving an atheist white wine.
I think white wine is either the urine or the sweat of christ. In either case, I'd recommend a Red Bull instead.
Quote from: MadBomr101 on June 25, 2012, 06:56:45 AM
Quote from: Stevil on June 25, 2012, 06:20:56 AMYup, its Jesus body, it just looks and tastes like bread.
Just an FYI to anyone who's never had the opportunity to enjoy the amazing taste treat that is the holy eucharist, it tastes like nothing at all. It has absolutely no flavor and simply dissolves on your tongue. I once asked the priest if they had any garlic flavored eucharist and I had to say seven hail mary's and a lord's prayer as penance.
Mormons, at least in my Mormon days, did a grape juice and bread cube thing -- which tasted exactly like grape juice and bread.
Communion was always my favorite part of church. It was like a little tiny saltine and a shot of grape juice. It was like a little snack time in the middle of church.
Grape juice is "Blood Lite." We use real wine in our communion!
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on June 25, 2012, 10:36:55 PM
Grape juice is "Blood Lite." We use real wine in our communion!
You know Mormons can't do that -- it'd be like drinking real coffee.
Communion. Now that's a practice from an outsiders point of view that looks like a load of lunacy.
Quote from: Crow on June 25, 2012, 11:17:43 PM
Communion. Now that's a practice from an outsiders point of view that looks like a load of lunacy.
On this side of the fence it can be a very moving ritual.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on June 25, 2012, 11:56:34 PM
Quote from: Crow on June 25, 2012, 11:17:43 PM
Communion. Now that's a practice from an outsiders point of view that looks like a load of lunacy.
On this side of the fence it can be a very moving ritual.
Well it must have something going for it to still be practiced. In terms of strangeness I would put it there with the Jewish Kaparot.
I'm allowed to make fun of Catholics because I was raised Catholic and practiced for many years (that's how it works, right? ;D). I can also confirm that there are Catholics who literally believe that the Eucharist turns into flesh -- my Dad is one of them. It's one of the churches many mysteries, or so he says.
As for the taste of communion, I agree, it tastes like nothing. I remember before my first communion, they let us try one of the non-blessed wafers. Us, being kids, all thought it was pretty gross and I remember asking if the blessed communion tasted better. I was assured that once it was holy, it was more palatable. ::) It was not.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on June 26, 2012, 12:14:15 AMAs for the taste of communion, I agree, it tastes like nothing. I remember before my first communion, they let us try one of the non-blessed wafers. Us, being kids, all thought it was pretty gross and I remember asking if the blessed communion tasted better. I was assured that once it was holy, it was more palatable. ::) It was not.
The wine's nothing to crow about either. The body and blood of christ aren't nearly as good as a simple plate of fried cheese and a cold beer.
Quote from: MadBomr101 on June 26, 2012, 01:06:20 AM
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on June 26, 2012, 12:14:15 AMAs for the taste of communion, I agree, it tastes like nothing. I remember before my first communion, they let us try one of the non-blessed wafers. Us, being kids, all thought it was pretty gross and I remember asking if the blessed communion tasted better. I was assured that once it was holy, it was more palatable. ::) It was not.
The wine's nothing to crow about either. The body and blood of christ aren't nearly as good as a simple plate of fried cheese and a cold beer.
I've never tried the wine. When I was a kid, it was sort of frowned upon (though I was never told outright I couldn't drink it), but the time I was older, I was well on my way to disbelief, so it didn't hold much appeal. I gotta say, everyone drinking out of the same cup didn't seem all that hygienic, either, though I get why they do it that way.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on June 26, 2012, 12:14:15 AM
I'm allowed to make fun of Catholics because I was raised Catholic and practiced for many years (that's how it works, right? ;D). I can also confirm that there are Catholics who literally believe that the Eucharist turns into flesh -- my Dad is one of them. It's one of the churches many mysteries, or so he says.
As for the taste of communion, I agree, it tastes like nothing. I remember before my first communion, they let us try one of the non-blessed wafers. Us, being kids, all thought it was pretty gross and I remember asking if the blessed communion tasted better. I was assured that once it was holy, it was more palatable. ::) It was not.
Ok, your Dad is a cannibal or at least he thinks he is one but isn't really. I'm not sure which is worse. I suppose my own father might have believed much the same, but in his defence, he had fairly zany notions about everything.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on June 25, 2012, 11:56:34 PM
Quote from: Crow on June 25, 2012, 11:17:43 PM
Communion. Now that's a practice from an outsiders point of view that looks like a load of lunacy.
On this side of the fence it can be a very moving ritual.
I have no doubt for believers it would be.
For Muslims so is throwing pebbles at a stone on Hajj.
Some people think dream catchers are nice.
Superstitions are comforting, enabling, possibly even exciting and treated as superstitions that's fine. However telling kids superstitions are real is wrong, it's misleading it is 'building a house on sand' and that is sad.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on June 26, 2012, 01:08:34 AM
I gotta say, everyone drinking out of the same cup didn't seem all that hygienic, either, though I get why they do it that way.
Oh, they wipe the lip of the cup with a napkin, so it's all good. ;)
I think it was Dane Cook who had a bit about the Eucharist and he called the Communion wafers "Jeez-its". He talked about how the priest would hold the entire bowl and he wanted to grab it and add milk like a bowl of Christ Chex. ;D
I grew up Catholic as well as many others, and I always would get the wafer spot welded to the roof of my mouth. One time, when they were extra stale, I inhaled some of the wafer dust and had a 10 minute coughing fit right in the middle of church.
Quote from: hismikeness on June 27, 2012, 08:40:10 AM
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on June 26, 2012, 01:08:34 AM
I gotta say, everyone drinking out of the same cup didn't seem all that hygienic, either, though I get why they do it that way.
Oh, they wipe the lip of the cup with a napkin, so it's all good. ;)
I think it was Dane Cook who had a bit about the Eucharist and he called the Communion wafers "Jeez-its". He talked about how the priest would hold the entire bowl and he wanted to grab it and add milk like a bowl of Christ Chex. ;D
I grew up Catholic as well as many others, and I always would get the wafer spot welded to the roof of my mouth. One time, when they were extra stale, I inhaled some of the wafer dust and had a 10 minute coughing fit right in the middle of church.
Sheesh.
SUch good parents forcing a child to do this.
Glad i never went through this. Glad you're out of it, mikeness. :)
Quote from: hismikeness on June 27, 2012, 08:40:10 AMOne time, when they were extra stale, I inhaled some of the wafer dust and had a 10 minute coughing fit right in the middle of church.
Choking to death on the body of christ, could there be a more ironic way to meet the maker? St. Peter would be laughing his ass off as that person approached the pearly gates. Jesus would eb there too being all
"Serously, my son, how f**king dumb are you?"
Quote from: MadBomr101 on June 28, 2012, 12:36:40 AM
Quote from: hismikeness on June 27, 2012, 08:40:10 AMOne time, when they were extra stale, I inhaled some of the wafer dust and had a 10 minute coughing fit right in the middle of church.
Choking to death on the body of christ, could there be a more ironic way to meet the maker? St. Peter would be laughing his ass off as that person approached the pearly gates. Jesus would eb there too being all "Serously, my son, how f**king dumb are you?"
When I was a kid, there was an older gentleman who had a heart attack and died in one of the back pews during a service.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on June 28, 2012, 12:51:05 AM
When I was a kid, there was an older gentleman who had a heart attack and died in one of the back pews during a service.
I hope they double checked he was dead, 'cause sometimes those services can put people into a deep state of torpor. I think it's a defence mechanism the brain uses in extremis.
Whole out shutdown and evacuation ;D
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on June 28, 2012, 12:51:05 AM
Quote from: MadBomr101 on June 28, 2012, 12:36:40 AM
Quote from: hismikeness on June 27, 2012, 08:40:10 AMOne time, when they were extra stale, I inhaled some of the wafer dust and had a 10 minute coughing fit right in the middle of church.
Choking to death on the body of christ, could there be a more ironic way to meet the maker? St. Peter would be laughing his ass off as that person approached the pearly gates. Jesus would eb there too being all "Serously, my son, how f**king dumb are you?"
When I was a kid, there was an older gentleman who had a heart attack and died in one of the back pews during a service.
Did everyone gather to pray around him? O_O
Quote from: Sweetdeath on June 28, 2012, 03:29:59 AM
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on June 28, 2012, 12:51:05 AM
Quote from: MadBomr101 on June 28, 2012, 12:36:40 AM
Quote from: hismikeness on June 27, 2012, 08:40:10 AMOne time, when they were extra stale, I inhaled some of the wafer dust and had a 10 minute coughing fit right in the middle of church.
Choking to death on the body of christ, could there be a more ironic way to meet the maker? St. Peter would be laughing his ass off as that person approached the pearly gates. Jesus would eb there too being all "Serously, my son, how f**king dumb are you?"
When I was a kid, there was an older gentleman who had a heart attack and died in one of the back pews during a service.
Did everyone gather to pray around him? O_O
Uuhhhhh, no. They called an ambulance.
My mother told me that during one of her church services the preacher had a stroke. They called an ambulance too though I don't doubt the feverish praying sessions came soon afterward.
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on June 28, 2012, 05:00:52 AM
My mother told me that during one of her church services the preacher had a stroke. They called an ambulance too though I don't doubt the feverish praying sessions came soon afterward.
That's what i figured.
Quote from: Sweetdeath on June 28, 2012, 06:26:45 AM
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on June 28, 2012, 05:00:52 AM
My mother told me that during one of her church services the preacher had a stroke. They called an ambulance too though I don't doubt the feverish praying sessions came soon afterward.
That's what i figured.
So they first put their faith in medical science, then when there is nothing more that they can do, they then put their faith into the kingdom of god.
Speaks volumes doesn't it?
Quote from: Stevil on June 28, 2012, 08:16:01 AM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on June 28, 2012, 06:26:45 AM
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on June 28, 2012, 05:00:52 AM
My mother told me that during one of her church services the preacher had a stroke. They called an ambulance too though I don't doubt the feverish praying sessions came soon afterward.
That's what i figured.
So they first put their faith in medical science, then when there is nothing more that they can do, they then put their faith into the kingdom of god.
Speaks volumes doesn't it?
Seems like the logical thing to do...don't you think?
Either we ( religious types ) are deluded for praying first and then dialing 911 or we're deluded for dialing 911 and then praying.
Of course we "put our faith in medical science". Whom else but God created us with intelligence? If there is no "911" to call upon, then prayer is the only thing left other than our own knowledge of what to do in an emergency.
The Church I belong to is quite interested in the medical sciences.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 28, 2012, 03:56:35 PM
Either we ( religious types ) are deluded for praying first and then dialing 911 or we're deluded for dialing 911 and then praying.
Yup atheist usually view praying as pretty delusional.
Quote from: Crow on June 28, 2012, 06:33:34 PM
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 28, 2012, 03:56:35 PM
Either we ( religious types ) are deluded for praying first and then dialing 911 or we're deluded for dialing 911 and then praying.
Yup atheist usually view praying as pretty delusional.
Please correct me if I'm wrong...but I'm sure even atheists have thoughts of hope/prayer that cross the mind. That's not to say atheists "pray".
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 28, 2012, 07:13:01 PM
Please correct me if I'm wrong...but I'm sure even atheists have thoughts of hope/prayer that cross the mind. That's not to say atheists "pray".
Hope is different to prayer isn't it.
I hope it is sunny on my wedding day is different from I am praying for sun on my wedding day.
Hope implies desire, the other implies making a wish and changing the course of the future
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 28, 2012, 03:56:35 PM
Either we ( religious types ) are deluded for praying first and then dialing 911 or we're deluded for dialing 911 and then praying.
You've already had a recent argument about putting words in people's mouths right?
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 28, 2012, 07:13:01 PM
Quote from: Crow on June 28, 2012, 06:33:34 PM
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 28, 2012, 03:56:35 PM
Either we ( religious types ) are deluded for praying first and then dialing 911 or we're deluded for dialing 911 and then praying.
Yup atheist usually view praying as pretty delusional.
Please correct me if I'm wrong...but I'm sure even atheists have thoughts of hope/prayer that cross the mind.
Hope and prayer are two different things entirely. Thoughts of hope, maybe (though, I try to go more for "realistic" than "hopeful"). Prayer? Nope.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 28, 2012, 07:13:01 PM
Quote from: Crow on June 28, 2012, 06:33:34 PM
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 28, 2012, 03:56:35 PM
Either we ( religious types ) are deluded for praying first and then dialing 911 or we're deluded for dialing 911 and then praying.
Yup atheist usually view praying as pretty delusional.
Please correct me if I'm wrong...but I'm sure even atheists have thoughts of hope/prayer that cross the mind. That's not to say atheists "pray".
So who would they pray to?
Quote from: Stevil on June 28, 2012, 08:15:26 PM
Hope is different to prayer isn't it.
I hope it is sunny on my wedding day is different from I am praying for sun on my wedding day.
I implies desire, the other implies making a wish and changing the course of the future
While it is not my intention to equate the two, making desire known or thinking it and wishing for a change could be the same thing. The difference being one is a solely internal thought and the other is an internal prayer TOO God. Both are looking for the same preferred outcome.
Again...not that the atheist prays.
Quote from: Stevil on June 28, 2012, 08:17:35 PM
You've already had a recent argument about putting words in people's mouths right?
I put words in someone's mouth here? If I did, please show me how exactly I did that. I was having a thought that I'm open to being wrong about.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on June 28, 2012, 08:24:21 PM
Hope and prayer are two different things entirely. Thoughts of hope, maybe (though, I try to go more for "realistic" than "hopeful"). Prayer? Nope.
I would more disagree, but that may be because of my biased position. To me it seems to hope is much like praying. One can say they pray for rain and mean they hope for rain and likewise one can hope for rain and mean they pray for rain. If it's too offensive it's ok. I'm not trying to start anything.
Again, I'm not married to this thought, I'm just having a difference of opinion where one person thought it was comedic that the Christian's put their "faith" in medicine before putting their faith in God. It's logical to seek medical care.
Quote from: En_Route on June 28, 2012, 08:53:22 PM
So who would they pray to?
Nothing.
When a person makes a statement of; "I hope it is sunny on my wedding day." to whom is that directed to? Is rain or stormy weather just as welcome than a sunny day? It seems to me there is a preference.
I don't know, I'm just thinking outloud and don't really care too much either way. I just thought it was funny that according to the atheist, if he/she calls 911 first then prays in hope of something or prays first hoping God will answer immediately and then calls 911...either way "it speaks volumes."
I hope and pray I didn't put words in anyone's mouth.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 28, 2012, 09:30:32 PM
While it is not my intention to equate the two, making desire known or thinking it and wishing for a change could be the same thing. The difference being one is a solely internal thought and the other is an internal prayer TOO God. Both are looking for the same preferred outcome.
Again...not that the atheist prays.
With hope, one does not have an expectation of changing the future.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 28, 2012, 09:30:32 PM
I put words in someone's mouth here? If I did, please show me how exactly I did that. I was having a thought that I'm open to being wrong about.
Quote
Either we ( religious types ) are deluded for praying first and then dialing 911 or we're deluded for dialing 911 and then praying.
When did I ever say you were deluded?
Quote from: Stevil on June 28, 2012, 09:35:51 PM
When did I ever say you were deluded?
You haven't that I know of. I stand corrected.
So what did you mean exactly by, "Speaks volumes doesn't it?"
Quote from: Stevil on June 28, 2012, 08:16:01 AM
So they first put their faith in medical science, then when there is nothing more that they can do, they then put their faith into the kingdom of god.
Speaks volumes doesn't it?
If it doesn't imply delusion or something of that nature, what does it mean? ( For future reference )
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 28, 2012, 09:30:32 PM
Nothing.
When a person makes a statement of; "I hope it is sunny on my wedding day." to whom is that directed to? Is rain or stormy weather just as welcome than a sunny day? It seems to me there is a preference.
I agree I am expressing a preference. But that's it. It's not asking anybody to change or influence matters to accommodate my preferences.
Quote from: En_Route on June 28, 2012, 10:31:53 PM
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 28, 2012, 09:30:32 PM
Nothing.
When a person makes a statement of; "I hope it is sunny on my wedding day." to whom is that directed to? Is rain or stormy weather just as welcome than a sunny day? It seems to me there is a preference.
I agree I am expressing a preference. But that's it. It's not asking anybody to change or influence matters to accommodate my preferences.
Yep, this is my take on it. Prayer requires something that is prayed
to. Otherwise it's just thinking/musing/wishing, etc.
Edit: Pretty much every definition of prayer that I can find online makes reference to an object of prayer.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 28, 2012, 09:44:04 PM
You haven't that I know of. I stand corrected.
So what did you mean exactly by, "Speaks volumes doesn't it?"
That even the believers first look to material answers when expediency is required.
It's like that saying that there are no atheists in foxholes. I would say there aren't many theists in the foxholes.
When push comes to shove we look to ourselves and our actions for survival, praying to gods is a luxury that only those with time to spare can choose to do.
Seeking the kingdom of god does not come first. Survival comes first.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 28, 2012, 09:44:04 PM
Quote from: Stevil on June 28, 2012, 08:16:01 AM
So they first put their faith in medical science, then when there is nothing more that they can do, they then put their faith into the kingdom of god.
Speaks volumes doesn't it?
If it doesn't imply delusion or something of that nature, what does it mean? ( For future reference )
It means people first seek to survive via material means. Our reality is different to the stories of the bible, we don't seek Jesus and then poof our loved ones are cured. Christians know (no delusion here) this to be true. They have proven that they know this to be true. They seek god's help only when time allows, when there is nothing more "material" that they can do.
Quote from: En_Route on June 28, 2012, 10:31:53 PM
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 28, 2012, 09:30:32 PM
Nothing.
When a person makes a statement of; "I hope it is sunny on my wedding day." to whom is that directed to? Is rain or stormy weather just as welcome than a sunny day? It seems to me there is a preference.
I agree I am expressing a preference. But that's it. It's not asking anybody to change or influence matters to accommodate my preferences.
In prayer, I too am expressing a preference, a hope. Just because I pray for something does not force God to do my will in that instance.
Anyway. I didn't mean for this to become a very big deal. 'Twas just thought.
Quote from: Stevil on June 28, 2012, 10:44:45 PM
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 28, 2012, 09:44:04 PM
You haven't that I know of. I stand corrected.
So what did you mean exactly by, "Speaks volumes doesn't it?"
That even the believers first look to material answers when expediency is required.
It's like that saying that there are no atheists in foxholes. I would say there aren't many theists in the foxholes.
When push comes to shove we look to ourselves and our actions for survival, praying to gods is a luxury that only those with time to spare can choose to do.
Seeking the kingdom of god does not come first. Survival comes first.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 28, 2012, 09:44:04 PM
Quote from: Stevil on June 28, 2012, 08:16:01 AM
So they first put their faith in medical science, then when there is nothing more that they can do, they then put their faith into the kingdom of god.
Speaks volumes doesn't it?
If it doesn't imply delusion or something of that nature, what does it mean? ( For future reference )
It means people first seek to survive via material means. Our reality is different to the stories of the bible, we don't seek Jesus and then poof our loved ones are cured. Christians know (no delusion here) this to be true. They have proven that they know this to be true. They seek god's help only when time allows, when there is nothing more "material" that they can do.
I can agree with that. It's a lot like the notion that God helps those who help themselves. In other words sometimes we can create our own "miracles" in that sometimes the miracle is born simply of want to survive. Courage, birthed from fear, sometimes causes us to do things we wouldn't otherwise do when death isn't staring us in the face. One might ask, then how did God help in this situation? One person gives the glory to God for courage another gives self a pat on the back for the same. That's all.
What I would say, with or without art work is I don't think he existed. No records other than the bible, and we all know its accuracy rate is not even as good as Gov. Perry in Texas. Bits and pieces of a half dozen sun gods to make up the tails of his life, no records from a Roman culture who recorded everything in detail. Seems strange they would not record the execution of a man claiming to be the son of god and the king of men. Too many things just don't match up and I see his character, thin or not, as being a fraud; which has resulted in the killing of 250,000,000 people and counting.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 28, 2012, 10:47:33 PMIn prayer, I too am expressing a preference, a hope. Just because I pray for something does not force God to do my will in that instance.
Hope = Wishing it were so.
Prayer = Hoping god makes it so through divine intervention.
Hope is one thing, Prayer is another. That's why we have separate words to distinguish the two.
This concludes today's lesson in the obvious.
Quote from: MadBomr101 on June 29, 2012, 01:37:34 AM
This concludes today's lesson in the obvious.
It certainly does.
Hope can possibly become a bit irrational, the active willing of your creature/person or thing across the finish line or the survival of little fluffy crossing the minefield.
Quote from: The Magic Pudding on June 29, 2012, 05:05:50 AM
Hope can possibly become a bit irrational, the active willing of your creature/person or thing across the finish line or the survival of little fluffy crossing the minefield.
Hope can be an optimistic outlook.
You may work hard to achieve a goal, if you have no hope of achieving that goal, you ought to reassess your goals.
A pessimist may feel in a hopeless position more often than an optimist, It doesn't matter what they do, their goal won't be achieved. Without hope a person may become despondent, may lack motivation, and may become depressed. With hope, comes opportunity, motivation and confidence.
When a person expresses their hope for something, they are merely communicating their preference or their goal (if it is something within their control). Maybe they want others to help them achieve this goal or simply to support and cheer them on, maybe they are a dreamer and are fantasizing about their goals.
I'm not sure how this relates to prayer.
Is prayer a wishlist, hoping god will change the course of the future, or an imaginary conversation with an imaginary "best friend" whom one can imagine is supporting by sharing the hopes and dreams of the prayer maker (but without intervening).
Prayer
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 28, 2012, 10:47:33 PM
In prayer, I too am expressing a preference, a hope. Just because I pray for something does not force God to do my will in that instance.
Just out of curiosity,
If you cannot change gods plan, what is the point of prayer? If hope is the only outcome of prayer, why pray? Why not just hope? I fail to see the purpose of prayer.
For clarification, please:
When you pray, are you literally speaking to your god?
Do you believe your god hears you?
Does your god respond in any way?
Quote from: Genericguy on June 29, 2012, 06:47:34 PM
Does your god respond in any way?
I doubt AD is psychotic enough to have god talk to him ???
Quote from: Genericguy on June 29, 2012, 06:47:34 PM
Just out of curiosity,
If you cannot change gods plan, what is the point of prayer? If hope is the only outcome of prayer, why pray? Why not just hope? I fail to see the purpose of prayer.
There is some evidence to show that prayer can "change" God's plan. However, in context, God's plan is set in stone in that He already knows the outcome of every possible scenario and His plan is the one that will be done. That's not to say that God manipulates all things to work out as He chooses, but that THROUGH all things His will is accomplished.
Why pray? In context, God is our Father. Prayers ( incidently, should always be directed to God the Father, not to Jesus...something that most Christians don't even realize. ) to him are from that context. We as kids ask our parents all kinds of things. Some we get, most we must wait for or we never get. Ultimately our parents normally know what is best even when we don't, as kids, understand life. Prayers are not so much an act of asking for things, but a communication ( one way for the most part ). Most of my prayers are about thanks. I normally pray before every meal just to thank God for all He's done, both seen and unseen...life, food, assurance of salvation, family, health. And when sickness comes, I pray for healing. Does God always heal me? Probably the answer is the sickness takes its course and I eventually get better by my own body functions...which I believe in itself is an indirect answer from God since God made us with these functions. But even my prayers are not enough. They are mostly out of
the thing to do at the time. I should spend more time in prayer and study...but I spend that time here on HAF.
Quote from: GenericguyFor clarification, please:
When you pray, are you literally speaking to your god?
Do you believe your god hears you?
Does your god respond in any way?
I don't know what you mean by "literally speaking". If God is, then he does hear. It's not a dialogue if that's what you mean.
I believe God hears me.
Normally I see God working in my life in hindsight, not usually in the moment other than a peace of mind which it brings.
Quote from: Asmodean on June 29, 2012, 07:23:22 PM
Quote from: Genericguy on June 29, 2012, 06:47:34 PM
Does your god respond in any way?
I doubt AD is psychotic enough to have god talk to him ???
Just a bit psychotic...but not psychotic enough. ;)
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 29, 2012, 08:36:40 PM
I should spend more time in prayer and study...but I spend that time here on HAF.
So we have corrupted you at least a little! ;D
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 29, 2012, 08:36:40 PM
Quote from: Genericguy on June 29, 2012, 06:47:34 PM
Just out of curiosity,
If you cannot change gods plan, what is the point of prayer? If hope is the only outcome of prayer, why pray? Why not just hope? I fail to see the purpose of prayer.
There is some evidence to show that prayer can "change" God's plan. However, in context, God's plan is set in stone in that He already knows the outcome of every possible scenario and His plan is the one that will be done. That's not to say that God manipulates all things to work out as He chooses, but that THROUGH all things His will is accomplished.
Why pray? In context, God is our Father. Prayers ( incidently, should always be directed to God the Father, not to Jesus...something that most Christians don't even realize. ) to him are from that context. We as kids ask our parents all kinds of things. Some we get, most we must wait for or we never get. Ultimately our parents normally know what is best even when we don't, as kids, understand life. Prayers are not so much an act of asking for things, but a communication ( one way for the most part ). Most of my prayers are about thanks. I normally pray before every meal just to thank God for all He's done, both seen and unseen...life, food, assurance of salvation, family, health. And when sickness comes, I pray for healing. Does God always heal me? Probably the answer is the sickness takes its course and I eventually get better by my own body functions...which I believe in itself is an indirect answer from God since God made us with these functions. But even my prayers are not enough. They are mostly out of the thing to do at the time. I should spend more time in prayer and study...but I spend that time here on HAF.
Quote from: GenericguyFor clarification, please:
When you pray, are you literally speaking to your god?
Do you believe your god hears you?
Does your god respond in any way?
I don't know what you mean by "literally speaking". If God is, then he does hear. It's not a dialogue if that's what you mean.
I believe God hears me.
Normally I see God working in my life in hindsight, not usually in the moment other than a peace of mind which it brings.
From my former perspective as a christian, I understand this. Funny, but I get it. Doesn't mean I still think the same way, but totally get it.
:)
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on June 29, 2012, 08:56:16 PM
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 29, 2012, 08:36:40 PM
I should spend more time in prayer and study...but I spend that time here on HAF.
So we have corrupted you at least a little! ;D
If it wasn't HAF, it would be something else. Don't congratulate yourselves too quickly. ;)
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 29, 2012, 09:38:57 PM
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on June 29, 2012, 08:56:16 PM
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 29, 2012, 08:36:40 PM
I should spend more time in prayer and study...but I spend that time here on HAF.
So we have corrupted you at least a little! ;D
If it wasn't HAF, it would be something else. Don't congratulate yourselves too quickly. ;)
Too late. I've already made "AD CORRUPTER" T-shirts. ;D
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on June 29, 2012, 10:22:21 PM
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 29, 2012, 09:38:57 PM
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on June 29, 2012, 08:56:16 PM
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on June 29, 2012, 08:36:40 PM
I should spend more time in prayer and study...but I spend that time here on HAF.
So we have corrupted you at least a little! ;D
If it wasn't HAF, it would be something else. Don't congratulate yourselves too quickly. ;)
Too late. I've already made "AD CORRUPTER" T-shirts. ;D
D'oh! Well, I get a cut of the profits.