|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'll just quote Richard Dawkins and be done with it, "Everybody is an atheist in saying that there is a god - from Ra to Shiva - in which he does not believe. All that the serious and objective atheist does is to take the next step and to say that there is just one more god to disbelieve in."
On the side topic of the ridiculous scam company that makes up the film ratings in the United States they traditionally rate realistic consequence showing violence heavier then they rate huge amounts of "softer" violence. When James Bond shoots 40 soldiers with hardly any blood shown or repercussions for taking 40 lives that's PG-13 which is more accessible to children then a movie that shows actually warzone footage which is deemed too graphic and given an R rating. Reality isn't for minors for some reason. Feel free to give This Film is Not Yet Rated a watch on that topic.
If you use that definition of gods, then most of the gods that have been worshiped throughout history aren't really gods.
Hence my clever use of the term "modern."
Also, wouldn't most of Western Civilization, atheist or otherwise, agree that "most of the gods that have been worshiped throughout history aren't really gods?"
The point is that if Golarion were real and if I found myself there tomorrow, the existence of what they call gods wouldn't change my atheism one whit. I can and would readily accept that there are beings more advanced and powerful than humans given the evidence. That doesn't make those beings gods in the sense to which I object.
I'll just quote Richard Dawkins and be done with it, "Everybody is an atheist in saying that there is a god - from Ra to Shiva - in which he does not believe. All that the serious and objective atheist does is to take the next step and to say that there is just one more god to disbelieve in."
This.
If you use that definition of gods, then most of the gods that have been worshiped throughout history aren't really gods.Hence my clever use of the term "modern."
Since belief in mega-powerful creator gods have been around since antiquity, I'm not sure "modern" is a really good modifier. Sure, creator-god monotheisms have persisted to the modern age, but their ideas really aren't modern.
Since belief in mega-powerful creator gods have been around since antiquity, I'm not sure "modern" is a really good modifier. Sure, creator-god monotheisms have persisted to the modern age, but their ideas really aren't modern.If you use that definition of gods, then most of the gods that have been worshiped throughout history aren't really gods.Hence my clever use of the term "modern."
...which is why what I actually wrote was "modern western sense," which is clearly monotheistic with a side of omnipotence.
Read the posts, people. ;-)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So we started with a discussion about if people of a particular faith would have any conflict of faith playing a game, and now we have moved on to saying that said faith is inferior?
(Not referring to the "modern" discussion, but the Richard Dawkins quote. You do realize that a good number people of religious standings see him as basically the atheistic version of the WBC, right?)
(Not referring to the "modern" discussion, but the Richard Dawkins quote. You do realize that a good number people of religious standings see him as basically the atheistic version of the WBC, right?)
I really have no response to that, other than no, I wasn't aware of that. That's...creepy.
I see that one could argue that simply because faith in Shiva is now held to be generally unfounded, we cannot conclude that all faith is therefore unfounded (though the number of "defunct" gods is certainly on Dawkin's side).
But I don't see how you get inferior from that, unless you take "untrue" to mean inferior. In which case simply stating that you don't share someone's beliefs is equivalent to oppressing them...and that's a very troubling road.
In Dawkin's (non-)defense, he has a tendency to be an ass.
In Dawkin's (non-)defense, he has a tendency to be an ass.
An ass? Sure. Equivalent to the WBC? Not seeing it.
But I think most of us can agree that there should be no problem with a Christian playing Pathfinder, which is what this thread is about.
I watched Hell House the other day.
One of the organizers thought Magic: The Gathering was a roleplaying game. They also had a "who's on first" moment trying to dictate the title of the game.
Guy: It's called Magic: The Gathering
Girl: Okay, so "Games like The Gathering"
Guy: No, it's called Magic
Girl: "Games similar to Magic"
Guy: Magic: The Gathering
Girl: I don't get it, is it called Magic? Or The Gathering?
One of the organizers though Magic: The Gathering was a roleplaying game.
Interesting that they didn't even know it was a CCG, but still knew it was a sure path to hell. ;-)
|
Just noticed this thread, and haven't read all 260+ posts. But seriously, there are still people who believe this nonsense? Really???
But this does remind me of one of the best examples I've ever seen of Poe's Law in action: Should Christians play chess?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Should Christians play chess?
Pure, unadulterated win.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just noticed this thread, and haven't read all 260+ posts. But seriously, there are still people who believe this nonsense? Really???
But this does remind me of one of the best examples I've ever seen of Poe's Law in action: Should Christians play chess?
Thanks for the education re:Poe's Law. I realise now that I should have put a smiley face after my 'Should Atheists Play Pathfinder' post.
It's hard to maintain a dry sense of humour on the Internet. : /
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's a game. That's all.
Anybody who says they're 'dangerous' are simply displaying their ignorance. Ignore them.
|
|
So we started with a discussion about if people of a particular faith would have any conflict of faith playing a game, and now we have moved on to saying that said faith is inferior?Why must you tempt me with such a perfect pitch? :)Or can Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Mormons, andAtheists all play Pathfinder together....
Without killing each other?
Mormons are Christians. Just like Catholics, Baptists, Methodists etc.
Their proper name is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
(Not referring to the "modern" discussion, but the Richard Dawkins quote. You do realize that a good number people of religious standings see him as basically the atheistic version of the WBC, right?)
He's picketing christian funerals saying that god hates you because you support homosexual rights?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Saying playing an RPG is a sin is like saying playing Monopoly is a sin. If I try to get loads of money from my opponnents by owning 2/3 of the boards properly, am I coveting and not loving them. Not because of that. If you pretend to kill and steal, that doesn't mean that you kill and steal, it just means you like to play in a game where murder and theft are common. If you feel it violates your christian code, choose a deity and play a Paladin. Everything you kill must be evil and you must follow a strict code. That's my two cents.
You do realize that a good number people of religious standings see him as basically the atheistic version of the WBC, right?
Sure, but does that viewpoint deserve any respect whatsoever?
Of course not.
|
One of our players in my PFRPG group has recently found faith and is now VERY involved with the Roman Catholic Church, which is THE foremost religious institution in France.
And I heard from another of my buddies that he asked about whether he could in good faith play Call of Chtulhu games without offending the faith he now fervently believes in.
Apparently, he was worried that, through playing at CoC, he might inadvertently be dabbling in things that had to do with actual RL demons (ie recognized as such by the Roman Church) or RL esoterism (which is also banned by the Church).
My buddy told him that CoC was mostly coming from the fevered imagination of Lovecraft and had nothing to do with actual RL occultism. So it was still okay for him to play while remaining faithful to his religious commitment.
Way I see it, his greatest worry was to be inadvertently disrespectful of his newfound faith, or even doing something actually forbidden.
Hope this helps.
Note that the vast majority of people (and RPG players) in France are nominally religious, most of them Catholics but also of other religions such as Judaism, Protestantism, Islam. "Nominally" is the key word here though. In most cases they are not so committed to their faith that they wonder if playing RPGs is compatible with their religion.
The anti-RPG craze in the 80s-90s never used religious arguments in France, or at least not successfully. Its most public proponents were psychologists denouncing its negative impact on the mental health of players and especially the risk of committing suicide. And the most active of the anti-RPG crowd was also part of the official committee against religious sects.
How do atheists play Pathfinder without compromising their unbelief?
In our fantasy worlds gods exist, directly (and provably) intervene (rendering that definition of 'faith' moot), and go round to the houses of atheists in the night and break their windows.
Won't playing in these games 'infect' an atheist with the concept of religion?
The logic here is flawed. Atheism is not something one protects and one cannot fall from Atheism. If an Atheist finds God then they cease to be an Atheist.
In general Atheists tend to be exceptional in their knowledge of religion. See http://www.pewforum.org/U-S-Religious-Knowledge-Survey-Who-Knows-What-About -Religion.aspx.
|
|
How do atheists play Pathfinder without compromising their unbelief?
In our fantasy worlds gods exist, directly (and provably) intervene (rendering that definition of 'faith' moot), and go round to the houses of atheists in the night and break their windows.
Won't playing in these games 'infect' an atheist with the concept of religion?
The logic here is flawed. Atheism is not something one protects and one cannot fall from Atheism. If an Atheist finds God then they cease to be an Atheist.
In general Atheists tend to be exceptional in their knowledge of religion. See http://www.pewforum.org/U-S-Religious-Knowledge-Survey-Who-Knows-What-About -Religion.aspx.
I realise now that I should have put a smiley face after my 'Should Atheists Play Pathfinder' post. I'm surprised that it was taken seriously, but I suppose I shouldn't be; this is the Internet, after all. : /