In my opinion claiming to get religion from divine connection is a purer source than a holy text. (No offense to devout readers of holy texts, I understand that all of those are believed to be the literal or close to the true word of God. Actually that seems to be to be pretty close to the divine connection.)
I read Lovecraft, but I haven't heard the Call of Cthulhu in a while. Is that bad? Do I need to go to a revival?
I read Lovecraft, but I haven't heard the Call of Cthulhu in a while. Is that bad? Do I need to go to a revival?A Call of Cthulhu revival -- that brings up some disturbing images.
Sort of like dropping acid at the Cirque du Soleil.
SHENANIGANS!
Aw, I was hoping for a discussion starter.
Discuss why the thread always gets bumped down all the time. I dare you.
discussion starter:
I know there was a thread on this specific issue last year or so, but rather than ask about possible Christian opposition to Halloween, I wondered if some non-Christians would be willing to share how they interpret this particular holiday in relation to their religious beliefs.
For example, if you don't believe in angels and demons, is it okay to still dress up as one for a party or allow your children to dress as such for trick-or-treating?
Haloween is traditionally the day that spirits of the dead come back to mingle with, not necessarily haunt, the living. As a non-affiliated nothing-ist, the only real problems I have with haloween are the rampant commercialization and "pranks", but those are problems with people not the holiday itself.
For me haloween, and other "religious" holidays, is more about what it represents to an individual; which in this case is usually candy, hanging out in funny costumes on street corners, and entertaining small children if you have them.
The modern opposition to Halloween is based on a fiction promoted by neo-pagans and literalist Christinas: namely that Halloween is a pagan holiday. In fact, it's Catholic. The American traditions of trick-or-treating, costumes, and jack-o'-lanterns evolved from the imported traditions of Irish Catholics (as interpreted by the confectioner/florist/greeting-card triumvirate). Halloween, like the Mexican holiday Dios della Muerte, is a folk interpretation of the more staid All Saint's Day.
To the question, as a secularist, I see Halloween like Christmas: the sentiment of the holiday can be appreciated without the spirituality (whatever you think it is). And who doesn't like candy?
Edit: I don't you you'll find anybody on the Paizo board who's opposed to pretending to be a supernatural creature. ;-)
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Huh. I thought the modern opposition (or at least the opposition that is getting more press this year) was a tit-for-tat due to the perceived "war on Christmas"/need for the media to have a story.
I always say that Halloween is the evil twin of Easter, and is great because it is the opposite of all the things that make Easter a lame holiday.
Costumes > Dressing Up
Trick or Treating > Church
Monsters, Pretend, Etc > Easter Bunny
Candy in the Evening > Candy for Breakfast
Non-Sunday > Sunday
Carving Pumpkins > Dying Eggs
Evening > Morning
Pagan > Christian
Evil > Good
Etc...
(and the above is intended more in jest than in seriousness. Easter lacks any religious significance to me. But I do hate Sundays. And Candy in the morning - that's a recipe for a bellyache. And eggs. How many eggs can you eat in a week and not get sick?)
To the question, as a secularist, I see Halloween like Christmas: the sentiment of the holiday can be appreciated without the spirituality (whatever you think it is). And who doesn't like candy?
As a Christian, I concur. I can enjoy Halloween as a secular holiday just like I can enjoy Christmas as a religious one. Going out tomorrow with my three daughters to go beg candy from the neighbors does not mean that I'm subjecting them to heresy or whatnot. If the neo-pagans want to dance around naked under the moon that night, more power to 'em, hope they have a ball. Same thing goes for Christmas - just because I believe the Savior was born that night doesn't preclude someone else from having fun and exchanging presents.
I'm getting sick and tired of the whole "I'm Offended" movement that's infected all bands of the political/religious spectrum. (not that that's what Lady Aurora was saying in her discussion starter post)
How many eggs can you eat in a week and not get sick?
Give me a week, and I'll tell you.
|
The modern opposition to Halloween is based on a fiction promoted by neo-pagans and literalist Christinas: namely that Halloween is a pagan holiday. In fact, it's Catholic.
I don't know if this is entirely true. (Not that I care really.)
Like so many other holidays that we celebrate, people were doing one thing and the 'christian church' didn't like what they were doing. But rather than try and force people to celebrate differently, they incorporated a little more of a Christian spin on it. In this case "All Hallow's Eve" is really the Catholic attempt at this (or at least I was led to believe) which is supposed to be today. This was one of the few times when it didn't work as intended, but it still ended up modifying Halloween from what it was originally. (I may not be entirely correct on some of this, but I think it's pretty close.)
In any case, we live on "Sleepy Hollow" (how cool is that?), and we will be taking our kids out to dress up, get candy, and have fun.
And Sebastian -- I had 4 hard boiled eggs in one day and nearly puked. I hate hard boiled eggs. (Not really much for chocolate either.)
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
And Sebastian -- I had 4 hard boiled eggs in one day and nearly puked. I hate hard boiled eggs. (Not really much for chocolate either.)
I fear the day when the kids are old enough to want to color them. It's too bad we don't eat bunnies instead on Easter. They're probably better than eggs.
In the meantime though, I will steal all of the Halloween candy collected by my children! All of it!!!
(I figure I'm being a good parent - they don't need to eat all that sugar. Me, on the other hand...)
For lack of solid religious discussion material, I was wondering if you nice folks would be willing to try for some philosophical-if-not-actually-religious discussions. Just because I'm interested in stuff like that and I think others here on the boards might be as well.
For example (since I'm the one suggesting it I may as well come up with a topic): Sartre's "hell is other people". Thoughts?
Personally I don't think he meant that being around other people is hell (most days), but rather us trying to please everyone or constantly caring what others think is like hell for the individuality. Sartre was a big advocate of the whole "do what you want" bit. What do you all think?
Actually, I'm pretty sure that the contrapositive is true.
Id Vicious' Proof of Vegetable Worship
1. In Catholic communion, worshipers consume wafers representing the body of Christ. Fundamentalists believe the wafers to actually be the body of Christ.
2. Communion wafers are made of starch and cellulose (so are some packing materials).
3. If communion wafers are both the body of Christ and made of starch and cellulose, then Jesus was a plant.
I saw the trailer for 1408 last night.
There's a line: "It's not that what I'm seeing is not real, it just ain't as real as it seems."
And I thought to myself, Wow, what great description of metaphysics.
Id Vicious' Proof of Vegetable Worship
1. In Catholic communion, worshipers consume wafers representing the body of Christ. Fundamentalists believe the wafers to actually be the body of Christ.
With all due respect, this is simply not true. It is Catholics that believe that the communion host when consecrated by validly ordained priest with the right intention to confect the sacrament, the host is changed into the body and blood of Jesus Christ through process called
Transubstantiation. This fact can confirmed by consulting
the CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH(Paragraphs 1375 et seq).
Dang. I was hoping that it would take at least three posts to find the faulty syllogism I inserted. Good to see people actually read these days. :}
I saw the trailer for [i]1408[/] last night.
There's a line: "It's not that what I'm seeing is not real, it just ain't as real as it seems."
And I thought to myself, Wow, what great description of metaphysics.
Sounds like an issue for existentialism!
Sounds like an issue for existentialism!
This looks like a job for...
Dun dun DUUUUUUNN!
EXISTENTIAL MAN!
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
If they are, then I'm screwed.What are the new seven? Is it the original 7 plus the 7 dwarves from Snow White?New discussion!
The Fourteen Deadly Sins.
GO!
So are all the doctors out there...
And the poor sufferers of hay fever...
Maybe it's the original 7 plus the 7 duff beers from the Simpsons.
Does a 'civil' discussion include 'bashing' organized religion? Gah! I just can’t stop stirring the pot. Wait? Do you hear that? It’s the censors! They’ve found me. Aaaaa
Most of the articles I've read present them more like new Commandments, rather than as single-word Deadly Sins, and seem to present the breakdown as something along these lines:
11. Thou shalt not pollute the environment, for nowhereth in Genesis doth it say, "And on the fifth day He created toxic waste, and saw that it was good;"
12. Thou shalt not amass vast amounts of wealth, for that be the provenance of those heathen Protestants across the Sea such as Joel Osteen;
13. Thou shalt not bugger thy choir boys, for thy rod and thy staff do not comfort them, but rather put them in Therapy;
14. Thou shalt not commit Abortion;
15. Thou shalt have no research into stem cells, for I, the lord God their Creator, am protective of them above all ye;
16. Thou shalt follow #15;
17. If ever thou questioneth #15, then goest thou and read #16 again, until it become clear to thee.
|
|
2. Thou shalt not amass vast amounts of wealth, for that be the provenance of those heathen Protestants across the Sea such as Joel Osteen;
Wait, the Church is gonna start following the teachings of Jesus, to shun material riches and gather up instead spiritual riches in Heaven, and regard wealth as a spiritual trap?
My world is all askew.
Wait, the Church is gonna start following the teachings of Jesus, to shun material riches and gather up instead spiritual riches in Heaven, and regard wealth as a spiritual trap?
Yeah, some Christians actually do advocate following the teachings of Christ. I've taken to calling the other ones (the ones that don't) "Biblists," rather than "Christians," in order to avoid confusion.
|
|
New discussion!
The Fourteen Deadly Sins.
GO!
Ok, with things like this, I don't know how serious you are looking for an answer. I'm going to assume that you are not terribly serious about it and not really give an answer (since I'm not entirely sure what the "question" is).
But for what it's worth, the Bible doesn't give a list of the Seven Deadly Sins. The list was compiled by one (two?) people long ago who were trying to condense what the Bible (supposedly) says you shouldn't do into seven (simple) "sins".
The list was compiled by one (two?) people long ago who were trying to condense what the Bible (supposedly) says you shouldn't do into seven (simple) "sins".
I thought the old testament was pretty clear. god created man and everything man does pisses god off.
|
New discussion!
The Fourteen Deadly Sins.
GO!
Ok, with things like this, I don't know how serious you are looking for an answer. I'm going to assume that you are not terribly serious about it and not really give an answer (since I'm not entirely sure what the "question" is).
But for what it's worth, the Bible doesn't give a list of the Seven Deadly Sins. The list was compiled by one (two?) people long ago who were trying to condense what the Bible (supposedly) says you shouldn't do into seven (simple) "sins".
Yeah, sorry about the confusion. In short, I believe that the whole issue is ridiculous, but seriously want to get to the bottom of it. Does that help?
And yeah, I know that the Seven Deadly Sins are not in the bible. They were compiled by one man that had lived a bacchanalian lifestyle that would have put Oscar Wilde to shame. The guy repented around age thirty, and somehow got hisself canonized. Weird. His name escapes me.
And yeah, I know that the Seven Deadly Sins are not in the bible. They were compiled by one man that had lived a bacchanalian lifestyle that would have put Oscar Wilde to shame. The guy repented around age thirty, and somehow got hisself canonized. Weird. His name escapes me.
Dubya?
|
|
Yeah, sorry about the confusion. In short, I believe that the whole issue is ridiculous, but seriously want to get to the bottom of it. Does that help?
And yeah, I know that the Seven Deadly Sins are not in the bible. They were compiled by one man that had lived a bacchanalian lifestyle that would have put Oscar Wilde to shame. The guy repented around age thirty, and somehow got hisself canonized. Weird. His name escapes me.
I did a quick research on Google (and we all know that if it is found on the internet then it must be true).
I found this fairly good article on it and it lists St. John Cassian as the first person to compile the list, but it looks like Pope St. Gregory the Great was the one that really adopted it into Catholic teachings.
Wikipedia also has a pretty good article but I don't really feel like it adds anything new. One thing that Wikipedia said that I felt was fairly appropriate was...
The identification and definition of the seven deadly sins over their history has been a fluid process and the idea of what each of the seven actually encompasses has evolved over time. This process has been aided by the fact that they are not referred to in either a cohesive or codified manner in the Bible itself, and as a result other literary and ecclesiastical works referring to the seven deadly sins were instead consulted as sources from which definitions might be drawn.
Hope that helps.
Who would have thought a public discussion about religion would be the safest thread in which to hide? ;) Absolutely the most though provoking thread on the net.
|
|
And yeah, I know that the Seven Deadly Sins are not in the bible. They were compiled by one man that had lived a bacchanalian lifestyle that would have put Oscar Wilde to shame. The guy repented around age thirty, and somehow got hisself canonized. Weird. His name escapes me.Dubya?
Kennedy?
I dunno...
EDIT: Moff mentioned St. John Cassian. That's the guy. Thanks.
Wow - something we can all agree on.
I find it interesting that we can debate civilly about the nature of religion, existence, and the soul, but can't touch the subject of Dungeons and Dragons without bickering.
Now that's just funny.
Give it time.
I don’t know. I cringe each time I get the condescending, “Daaaaaaaaah-ddy!” from my four year old.