[Proto]

Have any of you read the trilogy His Dark Materials trilogy (Northern lights, The Subtle Knife and The Amber Spyglass) by Philip Pullman?

I'd be interested in hearing opinions from Christians that may have read these books. Have they had much publicity, good or bad, in the US?

Atricle from The New Yorker here:

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/conten.../051226fa_fact

[oldfogey]

I've read the books, listened to the Radio4 CDs and seen the National Trust production. But I'm not a christian, so I'll go away.

[Proto]

Ok, anyone and everyone, Christian or not, opinions please.

PS Oldfogey, is that Drucker as in Peter Drucker, the Management Science guru type bloke? The Art of Management or some such bollocks? 'Twas a very, very long time ago. Think I've got a copy somewhere

[Scout]

Ignorant statement #1:

"every single religion that has a monotheistic god ends up by persecuting other people and killing them because they don’t accept him."

Ignorant statement #2:

"I don’t think it’s possible that there is a God;"

My 2 cents as a Christian.

[luvtolean]

Originally Posted by Scout

Ignorant statement #1:

"every single religion that has a monotheistic god ends up by persecuting other people and killing them because they don’t accept him."

I think it's totally true.

Name one that hasn't.

[CBRVFR]

Baha'i.
Essenes
Mennonites
Quakers
Shakers
I have yet to hear of Jehovah's Witnesses killing anyone, except by boring them to death.
If the Mormons went after anyone, it was probably in self defense.


I think that what you mean is if a religion wields political power over a nation, watch out.

And the argument is moot anyway. Godless ****s have killed in the name of Godless ****ism forever. So what's the point?

[BDA116]

I know of no instance of members of the Mormon church killing anyone in the name of God. Plenty have been murdered simply because of their membership in the church, though - and many legally thanks to the Governor Boggs of Mossouri.

[phobiaphobe]

Happy birthday, Devastatin Dave.


Sincerely, GOdless ****.

[CBRVFR]

Thanks, Phobe..

[phobiaphobe]

Originally Posted by CBRVFR

Baha'i.
Essenes
Mennonites
Quakers
Shakers
I have yet to hear of Jehovah's Witnesses killing anyone, except by boring them to death.
If the Mormons went after anyone, it was probably in self defense.


...

Just arguing for the sake of argument here... just to piss you off on the anniversary of your hatching.

Baha'is aren't monotheistic... (my high-school art teacher was a Baha'i... and a crazy fugger) I'm pretty sure they don't technically worship any sort of God, but I've got some reading to do.

Don't know what Essennes are, but mennonites, quakers, shakers, More-mawns and Jay dubyas fall under the realm of Christianity, technically. And you could argue that the Jay dubs have killed plenty of their own by forbidding blood transfusions.

I dunno it's late and I'm bored.

[jaim]

Originally Posted by Scout

Ignorant statement #1:

"every single religion that has a monotheistic god ends up by persecuting other people and killing them because they don’t accept him."

Ignorant statement #2:

"I don’t think it’s possible that there is a God;"

My 2 cents as a Christian.

Have to agree with the above. How come polytheists aren't as agressive about their religion(s)? Not complaining just wondering?

[oldfogey]

Originally Posted by Proto

PS Oldfogey, is that Drucker as in Peter Drucker, the Management Science guru type bloke? The Art of Management or some such bollocks? 'Twas a very, very long time ago. Think I've got a copy somewhere

Yes .

[oldfogey]

Originally Posted by jaim

Have to agree with the above. How come polytheists aren't as agressive about their religion(s)? Not complaining just wondering?

Because they don't assume "their" god is the only "right" one, so they don't have to force others to agree or treat others as a sub-class because they don't "believe".

[CBRVFR]

Originally Posted by phobiaphobe

Just arguing for the sake of argument here... just to piss you off on the anniversary of your hatching....

Arguments pissing me off? I thought you were offering me a softball to hit out of the park as a birthday gift.

Baha'u'llah taught that there is only one God and one human family, that all religions represent progressive stages in the revelation of God's Will, and that humanity is reaching its long-awaited stage of maturity, when a peaceful and just world order can finally be realized.

As far as Mennonites, etc.. Any group that separates itself from the crowd to pursue a different path should be considered separately. Quakers, etc. are pacifists, and should be credited for that. Essenes were a monastic group within Judaism during the time of the Temple. They didn't participate in secular life to any significant degree. I also didn't mention Unitarians, but I'm not sure that's actually a religion. ( joke.) Note: I don't necessarily endorse any of the above groups.

I suppose if even the Bahai get control over a nuclear state, the local population of 'anyone different' better keep their powder dry, but that has NOTHING to do with religion, and everything to do with human nature and nationalism/tribalism. Jews have suffered at the hands of Christians for centuries, but it has nothing to do with the techings of the New Testament. (Small comfort for my relatives expelled from Spain during the Inquisition..) As Church leaders began to stray from the message of peace ;"love your enemy and pray for those who persecute you" and to espouse hatred and tacitly (and later explicitly) endorse persecution, no one checked them. It's just human nature to hate anyone different and to accept any sanction from the church ( temple, mosque), state, or mob to do that.

Not to mention the ease with which people are willing to scapegoat all their problems onto an easy target. Like the Jews, the gays, the democrats, the Religious Right, the Arabs, the Stunters. Or the unbelievers.

The smugness of people who blame the problems of the world on religion is just another manifestation of the same sort of ignorance and bigotry they object to. It should be easy for them to see that, but it gets obscured in a haze of self-righteous, sanctimonious denial as they carve out a new orthodoxy of unbelief.

The problem isn't that the (truly) religious people **** things up, it's that the self-deluded, humorless assholes that feel their opinions are important enough to form the basis of criticism, mistrust, and abuse of "others" aren't successfully challenged. And it doesn't matter whether their hatred is couched in religion or not.

So there.




By the way, Proto, Hope you enjoy fish.

[CBRVFR]

Originally Posted by oldfogey

Because they don't assume "their" god is the only "right" one, so they don't have to force others to agree or treat others as a sub-class because they don't "believe".

That statement is historically untenable. Chanukah is a celebration of the military victory of the Israelites over the hellenistic Seleucid Greeks who were attempting to enforce their pantheistic, idolatrous religion in that country, even to the point of public executions of those who failed to go along.

How do you think that the Greek culture and religion spread throughout the ancient world, by acclaimation? Philip of Macedon and Alexander enforced it, often killing the priests and adherents of the former pantheistic religion if they wouldn't accept the new order alongside or in place of the old.

Do you think the more modern Hindu/Buddhist/Moslem/Seikh conflicts weren't tribal in nature? Or that the Hindus accept the religious beliefs of their neighbors as correct?

[luvtolean]

I guess this is a good question of meaning. I didn't read that article as it's long and I'm not real interested.

But I take it to mean, Christianity as the whole cult, for example, not just sects.

I didn't read the article, so I don't know what the author intended.

[esoteric]

Originally Posted by CBRVFR

And the argument is moot anyway. Godless ****s have killed in the name of Godless ****ism forever. So what's the point?

Worshipping gods of any sort is a more primitive belief (and better associated with primitive thoughts) than true godlessness (atheism) and has been prevalent over time. So if you assume godless and Godless to be the same term, then I expect you're quite wrong. Otherwise you're probably right for as short and novel as the "God" religions have lasted over the span of human history... that is assuming human history is measured in the scientific way and not the way those religions would have you imagine it.

AFAIK, Atheism has only been associated with groups that have outstainding power to kill as the various communist regimes adopted it as their state "religion", but I'd have a difficult time believing their killing was in the interest of atheism as opposed to their other national interests.

Now, if you're talking about animals killing each other, well, then that's probably the only thing more persistant than humans killing each other for any reason... again, unless you're considering the timeline of history of the "God" religions.

[phobiaphobe]

Originally Posted by esoteric

...
AFAIK, Atheism has only been associated with groups that have outstainding power to kill as the various communist regimes adopted it as their state "religion", but I'd have a difficult time believing their killing was in the interest of atheism as opposed to their other national interests.
....

You've just reinforced his point here.

[esoteric]

Originally Posted by phobiaphobe

You've just reinforced his point here.

I don't think so, but if I did I take it back.
Killing and not having a god isn't the same as killing for the sake of not having a god.

[phobiaphobe]

I think what CBRVFR was saying is basically that people kill each other regardless of religion.

[oldfogey]

Originally Posted by CBRVFR

That statement is historically untenable.....Do you think the more modern Hindu/Buddhist/Moslem/Seikh conflicts weren't tribal in nature? Or that the Hindus accept the religious beliefs of their neighbors as correct?

My comment was a positive response to the relative statement that monotheistic societies tend to be more agressive. Not an absolute one that polytheistic societies are never agressive.

Tribal conflicts happen, as you point out, universally and irrespective of religion. Religion has often been used as a weapon in a tribal conflict rather than being the cause. That's another reason for me to deny religion.

Originally Posted by CBRVFR

The problem isn't that the (truly) religious people **** things up, it's that the self-deluded, humorless assholes that feel their opinions are important enough to form the basis of criticism, mistrust, and abuse of "others" aren't successfully challenged. And it doesn't matter whether their hatred is couched in religion or not.

I wouldn't totally disagree, there are many decent people everywhere who believe in religion. I happen to think they'd anyway be decent people with ethics and without religion.

[CBRVFR]

Well, since we're both in the VFR tribe, I'll drink to that!