So yeah, I know some of you get all clenched up when religion is mentioned so feel free to wander about the poop thread for some ex-lax. For the rest of us who give a shit...

Here's a link for what will lead to good conversation and hopefully a potential pwning of the Dawkinsian ditto-heads, a review of what is looking to be my next book purchase:


http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/11/...Karen-Armstrong


A juicy quote from the book:




Should be a good read for anyone interested in the practice of religion, and wishes to understand the difference in mythos and logos and their application to modern theology. Plus pwning new atheists is always a joy. Radical my ass.

Wow finally a decent thread. As much I hate theological disputes I figoured that I would contribute to the discusion

Thesis no.1: Dawkins is a duchebag , half-brain fucktard , because using his naturalistic argument he tried to explain the indefinite,ergo , even in philosophy , relatyvistic argument always sux

Afer all these years of disputes between Philosphy and Religion he tried to solve the case by writing one , shitty book. What an impudence. Although , he is biologist

Thesis no.2 all the dudes who take Bible literally are also douchebags -
The Bible is wirtten in language of metaphors and allegories , ergo , apart from wrong interpretation of symbols etc. , lack of any interpretation leads to bigger lack of understanding-Captain Obvious

Blob Blob ^^

Oh man check out the dyslexia

Well Well Well

Parz się z kozą jamochłonie

I'm Polish

Hey guys , what you waiting for !!!!
Let's discusss
Brrrrraaaainstoooooormmm

Tak.
Lurker?

It's coming streetshaman!
But I've got to collect my thoughts first.

On an unrelated topic; I recently bought the Glenn Beck DVD Unelectable. Why did I buy it? I'm not too sure... I'm not even a conservative. But I do like to dabble in unfamiliar territory from time to time. There are some conservative values I agree with. And I'm realizing... I'm disappointed with Americas two-party system. They both suck.

Good thread though... I can't wait to get started!

From what I understand, those points are precisely what she may be arguing in her book. Hopefully it is as well written as the review makes it out to be.

I for one am excited to see a fresh counter-point to new atheists and their reader's digest level of understanding of the religious phenomenon.

BTW

Nice to see the entire quote by Marx in your sig. The context of the preceeding sentence really opens up the metaphor for a more robust interpretation of the point he was making.

Yep Yep
For a long time , my dear
The man with hat has send us
He told us some amazing stories
Now we're gonna dine on turtles

And all the n00bs like Magnum should stay away from this thread

Ahh the dinner table no-no's...religion and politics. Without derailing the topic, I think our two party system is completely flawed and merely demonstrates a pendulum democracy. Push to the edge until its time to swing the other way. Our political system is one big fucking Flying Dutchman ride at Six Flags.

Now back to the other heated topic...religion!

[quote name='streetshaman' date='Nov 11 2009, 10:54 AM' post='10991

Nice to see the entire quote by Marx in your sig. The context of the preceeding sentence really opens up the metaphor for a more robust interpretation of the point he was making.
[/quote]

Yeah the meaning of this metaphor express both the functionality of religion and human need for myth -creating mythological systems ,

OK... I'm ready streetshaman! Sorta...
I'm not sure where to begin though... I don't want to cover ground that you and I have already covered.

But I noticed, while reading that book review... It's blatantly plugging Christianity. If this book were plugging the "god concept" in general this thread wouldn't be so much a theological discussion as would be a discussion of spirituality. As you already know, I don't believe in god, but that doesn't mean that I'm not spiritual. I do feel a connectivity to things and I do see an inherent beauty in all things when I meditate. But god is not to credit. I guess if you want to call it "god" you may... But I put no such faith in an anthropomorphic supernatural being.

I had an interesting theological discussion with a friend of mine and he backed himself into a corner and said, "God does exist and he exists outside our dimension beyond time and space That's why we can't observe him". And I said, "Really... Reeeally?!?! How can you possibly know that?!?! And not only that, if he exists beyond time and space he couldn't possibly interact with us time and space dwellers because if he did, he would be subjected to the laws of matter, energy, time and space and thus he would cease to be unobservable.".

^^^ Just food for thought!
... And if your argument to that is; "God works in mysterious ways" I'll slit your throat with my dick cause that ain't an answer, that's an excuse!

By the way; Abrado... I'm in my element when it comes to discussions like this.

MAybe more adequate metaphor : ,,religion not as opium for the people, but placebo " -as a need of understanding empirrical reality , need of experiencing the world as a rational entirety.It sounds metaphisicallly kinda without any logical argumentation

This^^^

I like this a lot... It's not committed to a particular sky daddy.

"Religion is but a way of being spiritual... But it's often not an effective way of raising ones spiritual awareness. It's too muddled with fairytales. Fairytales that distract us from a higher understanding."
- Me (an atheist)

I did not gather that at all. In fact, it appears to take a more syncretist view , which is why I was imediately impressed. Excluding Christianity in a discourse on monotheism over the last 3000 is nearly impossible, so I think mentioning it and using ideas and passages from Christianity and the New Testament is simply part of the thesis. Especially since the reviewer mentions the book is no trippy dippy pro God book at the beginning of the review.

Only reading the book will we know for certain, which I plan to pick up tomorrow when I get off work. Now will it be interesting enough and unbiased towards any one faith enough to dissuade me from playing Dragon Age...that's the question.

And without going into rehashed arguments. I can relate to your view on spirituality vs religion and force vs. anthropomorphic. There are many many books on that/those subjects. I feel this book differs as it makes an attempt to purvey the practice of religion and why it is a necessary human behavior. Not only necessary but a worthwhile endeavor...while maintaining the view that not all religious practices and thinkers are fundamentalists.

You have to realize that those of us in between the brainwashed religious zealots, and the brainwashed atheistic zealots see each faction as overly simplistic and each a detriment to the progress of a well rounded, intelligent humanity that has the freedom to believe in all types of shit without blowing up the world.

Look at this way, many religious thinkers are inclusive to atheism...but very few atheists are inclusive to any religious notion. In fact the vocal majority atheists are often more zealous and exclusive and irrational than your average Christian or Muslim. How exactly are they freeing mankind from oppresive thought?


(edited for spelling)

No , the point is that these fairytailes are the way of the higher understanding, just like whole Ontological Proofs on Existence of God -this is a thesis from book: ,,The presence of Myth" by Leszek Kolakowski , which I found very juicy
And your ,,particular sky daddy" is one of the conceptualizations/personifications of God . Good evidence on how your ,,mythological awareness" is working right now

Ah glad i re-read before I posted. i was going to say something about myth and fairytales.

I agree entirely with Abrado's last statement concerning "fairytales". Myth seems to be a manner in which humanity wrangles things that cannot be completely understood. Just like we use metaphors to convey a deeper or broader understanding of difficult concepts; human cultures use myth in this exact same way. The silliness of the myth only attests to the silliness of the culture. More serious mythology comes from more serious cultures. A good religion or mythology is found when the culture hits the metaphoric nail on the head.

It is proposed that without mythology and therefore religion, mankind would have never evolved past eat, shit, fight, flight, fuck, die. While it can also be argued that we have not really evolved from that very far, I would assume that mythology has at least given us baby shoes. In our search for meaning and a higher level of living, mythology and religion have been there every step of the way...even if used as "opiates" or even reasons to not be religious.

I see what you're saying. But bashing Harris, Hitchens, and Dawkins does nothing to illustrate any point. I'm not swain by declarations of "these people are wrong" I'm swain by "this is why I'm right..." But I can't really judge... This is only a review!

And by the way; I'm not sure if you know this or not, but Dawkins has stated time and time again that if he were to rate his belief in god on a scale from 1 to 7 (1 being; Absolutely without a shadow of a doubt, there IS a god! 7 being; There is no way god exists!) he would be a 6. That's an honest answer and I respect his humility.


Let us know what you think of the book once you've read it.

I disagree.
Religious zealots can be a detriment to society because of their volatility and potential to act out violence to those with opposing view points (Example: Crazy Southern Baptists beating a homosexual to death - Muslim extremists strapping on bombs and detonating them in public places). A staunch absence of believe does not equal violence. Stalin killed lots of people and he was an outspoken atheist, but his atheism in no way fueled his murdering innocent people. He killed on his own accord by his own ideology and political motives. He may have been an atheist, but he certainly wasn't a rational thinking person. But can you see how an absolute devotion to one religious ideology can possibly drive one to do something detrimental to society? But as I'm sure you agree, spirituality is not a detriment to society and in no way can it compel someone to act out vicious crimes. I believe that spirituality and atheism are completely benign concepts. But religion can be very dangerous. Religion and spirituality are two totally different things. Religion is basically politics disguised as spirituality.

I think I just covered that.

Haven't we outgrown the need for spiritual metaphor and allegory?
Spiritual metaphor is only necessary when you trying to convey those abstract concepts to others.
That's when it ceases to be a personalized spiritual experience and becomes religion.

If there is a god... You would think that the purist relationship one could have with it is one that is personally experienced, not hearing about someone elses spiritual experiences (metaphors) taught to you in a church. The church is the middle man that distorts our true awareness.

The "sky daddy" thing was a joke.

Update: I'm now watching Return of the Jedi. The Holy Ghost of George Lucas is filling me!

No. Analysing symbols& metaphors is helpful to catch the relations between entities . According to Plato These relations are considered to be The Great Ideas . So it isnt necessary to convey meaning of symbols to other , because they're inborn

BTw the whole idea of ,,personal god" is such a bullshit. When we assume that something like ,,personal god " really exist , we also must accept idea that God in general doesn't exist -old relatyvist argument


Also , streetshaman , your vision of mankind ,,kill your father , fuck your mother " is very poetic. mmmm very tragic , perfect utopia . It kinda reminds me of Freud's conception : Ego,Superego, Libido. I hope you're familiar with this shit

According to Freud , Superego is transmitor of cultural principles , so without it ,we would be fucking and killing themselves , maybe eating our flesh after that

Everything is blood and sperm , baby

What are you implying when you say "entities"? Are you referring to biblical characters?

Lets get one thing strait... Symbols/symbolism and metaphors are mutually exclusive ideas in this discussion. They aren't even the same thing. If I'm to fully grasp what you are trying to convey than you need to stop interchanging the two words.
-But back to the topic at hand; METAPHORS: What good are they in a discussion about god? Metaphors are kinda' like art. They can be interpreted many ways. If there isn't an institution in place to instruct people as to what the meaning behind the metaphors are than there is no organized religion, only a personal interpretation of the fables.

Please. Explain to me the fundamental difference (in your own words) between a mythology and a fairytale.

If I'm to further my discussions with you it would only be appropriate for me to know your personal views in regard to religion, spirituality, gods existence (if any), and your interpretation of god. I need to know what I'm working with. As far as I'm concerned (in case you didn't already know), I'm a technically a deist but I'm an atheist in practice.

1. No . I'm reffering to the whole Entity: what is(gr. ontos on)each thing which can be represented by word like cat as a animal can be represented by word,,cat". Symbol is also that kind of representation, but not verbal -usually as an image,projection
a)meaning of sign reffers straightly to reality , like high temperature is a sign of fever.So the meaning of sign is obvious
b)Meaning of symbol isn' t always obvious , it can be interpreted in many ways , like Holy Grail can be interpreted as a Vagina.The real meaning of symbol is imposed by social consensus like for example Sheep in Bible means Jesus
ERGO The relations between symbols like for example Good and Evil(antagonistic terms ) are equal to relations in reality (antagonistic actions)Plato stated that these relations exists as Ideas

Sorry ,but these are my words , It's the way I can express my opinion
2.What's the difference between mythology and fairytales?They're both expression of mythological awareness .What differs them is area,where they are able to influence human imagination
Fairytales-local
Myth-universal

ask streetshaman , he's a specialist

I'm deist my heat ,mostly identyfiing with Marx's quote in my sig


I'm a deist by heart, identify with Marx's quote in my sig

If so, then why listen to Blood Mountain or watch the Return of the Jedi? Sure its entertainment, but its good entertainment and the methaphors conveyed are meaningful and at least for me, part of what helped me through random struggles of my own.



Not necessarily. At least I do not think so. I think there will 1) always be a human need for higher metaphors and 2) Conveying metaphors of a mythological nature do not automatically generate a religion. Again using Blood Mountain as a reference point...the band conveys tremendous mythological metaphors and yet I have yet to see a Masto-religion...as awesome as that could be.

Before moving on, I want to illustrate why I use BM as a point of reference. The opening lines of the album are

Hero of the Gods
Crossing of the Threshold
Belly of the Whale
Refusal of return

...which are homage the monomyth cycle as developed by Joseph Campbell the father of comparative religion. Those four lines are almost verbatim to the first phase of the monomyth as he outlines it.

Now also understand this is the same guy that assisted George Lucas with the Star Wars Trilogy and Lucas also used his monomyth cycle as the framework for the original trilogy. So we certainly have several metaphors borrowed liberally from a man whose entire life was spent decoding myths and symbols and how they relate to human psychology and spirituality. Whether or not the intent was dogmatic or quasi religious (which I do not think Lucas or the Mastodudes had any intent of this nature) the fact remains that both the movie and the music have made an impact on our interpretation of mythology in modern times and in some small way have influenced our perceptions of myth in relation to our own experiences. They validate the importance of myth in the age of information.





I agree in many ways, altho a decent church sure is helpful for someone on the path but doesn't know how to read the signs. I personally despise most forms of organized religion, but as you have stated, this is becuase men's politics warp the religion into something used to control others. Therefore I think churches should be used as stepping stones and foundations rather than daily societal affirmations of faith.




First let me say if there is any Oedipal Complex stuff going on in my writing, then its news to me! My dad is fucking awesome and looks like santa claus so there is no way I want to harm that guy. Plus he followed Hendrix tours around the east coast and played a jam session or two with the Allman Bros, so yeah..no daddy killing going on here And my mom is a great woman but not really my type. But yeah all jokes aside I understand some of Freud's Oedipal stuff , but I am more of a Jung fan than a Freud fan. Freud is too single minded imo. Not being confrontational but what gave you the impression that I write like Jim Morrison's lyrics in The End? I am intrigued!






I disagree. Having studied symbology, symbolism and art history, they are almost inseperable in my humble opinion. Divine metaphor, allegory, symbols, art, music, poetry, skateboard logos, MMO hotbar icons, they all share one critical element...they allow someone to recognize a larger data set in a micro format. Instant recognition, immediate influence. These pictures, words and sounds invoke larger imagery, grander concepts; they compact +2 to hit, +2 damage, immune to fear and 50 power points into- "bloodrage" the little pic of the orc face on your list of abilities that you click when you want to rage the fuck out on someone in a video game.

Art invokes emotions shared or formerly inexperienced. The first time I saw a Picasso illustration up close and actually in my hand I was overwhelmed with an aircraft carriers cargo bay of information and sensation. That one line drawing of a hand holding a flower, conjured all types of shit in my head and to this day, ten years later I can still feel the wisps of those emotions. I can still trace the influences on my persona to fragments of that day and in turn that day conjures a vast data set of my trip to Spain. All from a memory of one small black and white scribble.

Thats why Art is the perfect metaphor for the "God needs metaphor" argument. There is this grand mystery behind this 4 X 6 frame that some want to explore, some do not care for, and some find offensive. Just like god, higher modes of thinking are better dissected via metaphor, similie, art and music...smaller, more accessible packages. Just because people don't agree on what these smaller condensed bundles mean, doesn't mean they are not instrumental in discovery of new concepts and ideas...even if completely subjective and personal.



One is a make believe story told to children, the other to adults. The funny thing is both are used to show us how to kill the dragon. The "dragon" of course being what ever each individual person is afraid of. sexual assualt, a fear of clowns, an unsuccessful life, repelling aussie style upside down, etc. Myths give examples to adults on how to wrestle the demons in our subconcious minds.

And I am no expert, but thanks for the compliment. I just shoot the shit like anybody else, I just happen to like the subject moreso than others.

Yeah , Freud entirely determined my life, definitely my fav psychologist-controversial, strucural and topografical model of personality, defense mechanism hmmmm .Whole system was very COHERENT , pure yumminess. Yung was also influential, but I wasn't convinced by his works-oh maybe loveaffair with his patient-fucking rad, romantic

BTW LOL !
I wasn't referring to your style of writing-that you're kinda OEdhypal Type , I don't wanna be your psychoanalist.
Your vision of mankind without any cultural priniples(myths) is similar to Freud's conception of Superego-our consiensce,instancy of censorship .Superego is governed by social principles such as moral standard which used to maintain social order. Also we must state that ,, myth is affirmation of values" , it consists story about values , so it's the way to communicate/transfer values among society

Also Star Wars has some strong freudistic refferences, for ex Luke S.killing Darth Vader. Oedhypal Complex perfect example

Vagina Dentala!!!

Ahh sorry my bad, I was just being funny with the mom and pops. But yeah, I completely misunderstood you on the Oedipal thing.


Yeah Freud's cigar was smoking when Star Wars came out. Funny the more I think of it, the Jung/Freud battle was kinda Light/Dark Jedi respectively. All of the positive, or congenial moments are Archetypal/Spiritus Mundi and Jungian in nature and all the warped or creepy moments are Freudian Ego/Id/SuperEgo...and incidentally enough, J and F split ways over the notion of God (if I remember correctly).

Probably going out on a limb with that but hey, ya gotta cut loose sometime. Like Will Ferrell I was exploring the space.

Argument no.1:Freud is a spiritual father of Jung-true
Argument no.2: Creepy moments symbolise ID -thanatos, urge for dead-Freud theory
Conclusion:Jung in symbolical act kills his own father as Luke kills Vader=Oodephycal Complex

Freud's currrrse

You all are so intellectual.

Before I get started on your other points (I haven't much time. I've got to be somewhere soon) let me tackle this point you've made here quickly because I'm afraid this is just a simple misunderstanding. Metaphor applied in art... I get that. It's a necessary literary tool. I'm talking about describing ones personal spiritual revelations via anthropomorphism, allegory, and metaphor. Does that make sense? That last person that used anthropomorphism to describe a spiritual revelation and was taken literally by millions of people was Joseph Smith (his creditability is clearly debatable and we can get into that later). We must ask ourselves... Was Joseph Smith merely anthropomorphizing god by clever use of allegory and metaphor in an attempt describe his spiritual experiences that would otherwise (without the use of these literary tools) be completely indescribable to anyone else? The answer is NO. Joseph Smith literally meant every word of his experiences.

This metaphor/mythology/allegory/anthropomorphic discussion I feel is dragging us out to water and is pulling us away from the topic at hand.

I like your style, you can come and sit at the cool kids table.

What topic we were talking about? What's a meritum ?

you think?

,,Not necessarily. At least I do not think so. I think there will 1) always be a human need for higher metaphors and 2) Conveying metaphors of a mythological nature do not automatically generate a religion. Again using Blood Mountain as a reference point...the band conveys tremendous mythological metaphors and yet I have yet to see a Masto-religion...as awesome as that could be."

Yes . I agree with Street that conveying metaphors doesn't necessarily generate religion-what we have missing here is Rituals- IMO the empirical side of ,, Mithological Awareness" -how we can observe it , and how we can observe the way people interpretate symbols

Any examples ?

Question for today: What's your finest definition of religion ? Any quotes or authorities ro back up your thesis are welcome

Wake up basstarrrds I,ve already had my coffee and cigarette on breakfast

What punctuation ever did to you?

No no, she's just polish. Apparently that trumps dyslexia.

If she were Polish and dyslexic her syntax would be normal.

hey honey how was work?

OK, I guess.
I can't help but thinking how creepy this is.... How did you know that?

What's wrong with my syntax , Qpazaurusie ?

We're just messin' with you.
What does Qpazaurusie mean?


Back to the topic at hand... How exactly does mythology give credence to a divine creator?


Did you get that book yet streetshaman?

Qpa=poop in Polish
Qpazaurus=,,Poopazaurus"

I identify myself with statement ,,God is an atheist"

I'm waiting for our Great Forum Preacher to speak

I have spoken.

Oh. Preacher? I thought you said pederast. You must mean someone else.

Yeah Did you get that book finally , Streetshaman???
This discussion doesn't make any sense if you're permamently absent , dear <evil grin>

Hahah! I have not picked up the book yet. I have to take my car in for safety inspection stuff tomorrow morning, I will probably head over to the book store then to grab it.

I have been meaning to contribute more on this thread but I have been busy at work and in the middle of tough times with my ladyfriend, so once I get some extra time I will be back to post more longwinded insight into unverifiable topics.

Some find solace in suffering for the sins of Samantha Cunty face,
much to my chagrin we'll only ever eat artichokes on the Moon base.
The big fella thats made of cheese , craters in his boat-race,
gather round crackers, let me give your soul a cheddar taste.

Other stuff.


A little boy...

went out to play.

When he opened his door...

he saw the world.

As he passed

through the doorway...

he caused...

a reflection.



Evil was born.

Evil was born,

and followed the boy.



And the variation:

A little girl...

went out to play.

Lost in the marketplace...

as if half-born.

Hmm, I suppose

if it was 9:45,

I'd think it was



after midnight!

For instance...

If today...

was tomorrow...

you wouldn't even remember

that you owed...

on an unpaid bill.

Beatiful Dillinger!!! True masterpiece of postmodernistic speech!
Are you an incarnation of Samuel Beckett maybe

Street ,We cant wait . This board loves you

The true preacher Dill Pickles delivers the sermon. I am but a ham-fisted mongoloid in his presence.



I lamed out and still have yet to pick up that book.

But I was thinking about something that may coorelate to the symbol/myth tangent today.

The whole hoopla about Obama's choice of the words "Holiday Tree" instead of "Christmas Tree". The nature of the outrage is endemic (?) to the very issue at hand. Here you have an example of people arguing over what is consensually a symbol of charity and goodwill..be it pagan, pre-corporate christianity or some future freedom from robots day. This icon of goodwill is the epitome of cultural synthesis currently under the banner of a faith based on love and tolerance. So one would naturally conclude that such people who claim the symbol as reverent would also, by nature of what they profess, want the symbol to be one that exudes love and tolerance and forgiveness and all that jazz.

Granted one could point to Jewish laws also borrowed by the Christian marketing team in addition to the tree symbol to state the "God is jealous and no other Gods before me" clause in support of calling it a Christmas Tree. By by using old testament law, one would also have to follow 12,759 other things including (in the top ten no less) no graven images either. So that chucks the whole tree as a symbol of love and tolerance altogether.

Logically, none of it makes any fucking sense. If you sit there and try to figure out why these people are outraged, you will pop an eyeball. It is nonsensical. The tragedy of reaching a point where vocal elements of our species would rather be right for the wrong reason more than wise for the right reason is as stupendously ironic as arguing over a christmas tree. But this is all jibber jabber. Most people understand its a tree that doesnt mean shit, but yet somehow it does...and everybody knows it.


The fact that the semantics of the symbol are often more important than the symbol itself attest to an overly empirical humanity...




missing the forest due to the trees.

Imo ,,semantics" stands for the meaning of symbol , whitch in case of symbols is widely open for various interpretation , so the ,,apprioprate" meaning is imposed from above by authorities for example
This phenomenom is called ,,symbolic rape" I dunno

How extremely ironic (not the pun).

The 2nd part is David Lynch , hes very spiritual and that comes through in his latest works.
I praise him for he has taught me a lot about the fight within my own Inland Empire.

I dont know what God is, but I know what he isn't.