Golden Compass incites Catholics.

[NEON DEON]

Well here we go again.

"The League’s president, William Donohue, has criticised The Golden Compass, which stars Nicole Kidman, Daniel Craig, and Dakota Blue Richards, as being anti-religious."


http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/article2999647.ece


At least Donohue has not called for the producer of the film to be burned at the stake.

[Letum]

Complaining about this kind of thing is a shot in their own foot as far as dealienating the lay community is concerned.

[Chock]

More religious dumbasses, as if the world isn't in enough trouble because of it.

If the grasp on their congregation is so fragile as to be broken by a movie or a book, what does that tell them? And how much 'faith' are they placing in Catholics when trying to prevent them from seeing it? Not a very flattering view of your fellow believers to take that line and place so little trust in their judgement, in addition to which, complaining about it merely serves to popularise it and push it further into the spotlight.

:D Chock

[August]

More religious dumbasses

Will you please stop with the insults against religious people?

[Ducimus]

Complaining about this kind of thing is a shot in their own foot as far as dealienating the lay community is concerned.

....

The religious establishments of America have done a very good job of alienating or otherwise driving me far far away. The more they vocalize and assert themselves, the farther away they push me. I have resolved that i will only viist a church on two occasions in the remainder of my life.

My wedding.
My funeral.

Although some may argue both are one and the same. :rotfl:

[Chock]

Will you please stop with the insults against religious people?
Not when they behave like idiots and cause no end of trouble and strife in the world, no, I shouldn't imagine I will. It's a film, not the antichrist.

:D Chock

[Letum]

More religious dumbasses
Will you please stop with the insults against religious people?

That's not insulting all religious people.
Just the ones that are dumbasses.

You know....the oversensitive ones who jump up and complain about their religion
being insulted when it isn't.

Being religious is fine.
it's only when you are religious and a dumbass that you start to take offense against
things that just aren't offensive such as teddys called Mohamed, children's films or
even forum posts!

[STEED]

Who cares I don't.

[Skybird]

They complain about the film? :lol: How they must have yelled to heaven when the book first appeared! :rotfl: The movie is said to have deleted most of the book's criticism of the church!

Concerning religion: it shall not be allowed a voice outside a person's four walls, for if we do not manage to drive it back to where it belongs - the secret privacy of one's own mind -, and instead allow it to interfere with all and everything and education and politics and public life and science and culture and other people's private business where it puts it's impertinent little sniffling nose into, then it will lead us straight to our own self-made annihilation one day, calling that the responsibility of others, the evilness of man and any god's will and/or prediction as given in some scriptures - where in fact it has been religion itself bringing us to that event by blinding our minds and assassinating our reason, and it'S arrogance and ignorrance being the evil helping our suicide, and any god's will had nothing, really nothing to do with it at all, but only stupid men's tunnel-view.

And if that insults anyone's religious views, I don't give a bit for that and hope he sits with a red face for a long time to come, eventually his head exploding and ending the blasphemy that he poses to life itself. Or to use Pat's laconic words: if you tell me about what you believe, give me evidence, since else all you gonna get from me is mockery and ridicule, well-deserved!

The first two books (first one and a half, to be precise) I have read and it was good fun to do so, and I am looking forward to eventually enjoy the film in the cinema indeed. Would be my first visit to the cinemas since Lord of the Rings. In Germany, it is launched tomorrow, Thursday.

Has anyone seen the movie? What was it like, compared to the books? Does the movie transport the witty charm and intelligence of the books?

[Sailor Steve]

Evil in Pullman’s books is represented by the church, called the Magisterium, whose acolytes kidnap orphans across England...
If it's in England, then it must be the Anglican Church who are the bad guys. I'd think the Catholics would be happy about it.

[Chock]

Well strictly speaking, in England it should be C of E, the Anglican Church is pretty small potatoes in most parts of the UK, but, the book(s) bad guys are supposedly based on the Roman Catholic Church, which is fairly big in the UK although not as big as the Church of England, although attendance is apparently worse in the C of E, must be that old Catholic guilt kicking in on people:rotfl:

The Roman Catholic priests have something of a reputation for messing with choir boys in a lot of the UK incidentally, which doesn't help their cause and may be the basis for the book's premise.

:D Chock

[Reaves]

Well i'm an ex Roman Catholic because of morons like that in the Church. It's a foundation of hypocrisy like most organised religions.

I also hate atheists too, fanatical atheists can be just as bad as fanatical religious nuts. It's MERRY CHRISTMAS NOT HAPPY HOLIDAYS MOFO!

There is one God and any religious people who claim "their" god is the correct one is continuing a tradition of worship, nothing more.

[Skybird]

Well i'm an ex Roman Catholic because of morons like that in the Church. It's a foundation of hypocrisy like most organised religions.

I also hate atheists too, fanatical atheists can be just as bad as fanatical religious nuts. It's MERRY CHRISTMAS NOT HAPPY HOLIDAYS MOFO!

There is one God and any religious people who claim "their" god is the correct one is continuing a tradition of worship, nothing more.

Hey, Pat Condell doesn't like atheists either! they really got their share this time - at least those who want to convert people to atheism, and claim to be atheists but nevertheless speak soft and respectful of theistic religions. You don't believe me? Here is the evidence:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5cXWElb-GE

I try to convert people to only one thing: reason. what they believe or not, does not trigger me as long as they keep it for themselves, and do not try to enforce it onto others, the state and/or society.

[Chock]

MERRY CHRISTMAS NOT HAPPY HOLIDAYS MOFO!

:rotfl:

In the UK it will soon be: 'Happy non-denominational festive celebration to you', the way all the PC madness is going.

:D Chock

[Reaves]

I try to convert people to only one thing: reason. what they believe or not, does not trigger me as long as they keep it for themselves, and do not try to enforce it onto others, the state and/or society.

Exactly. I have my beliefs and generally do not speak about them unless prompted for certain reasons. I have no problem with other people either following or not following whatever religion they want, although Scientologists are simply insane, might as well believe in Middle Earth!


In the UK it will soon be: 'Happy non-denominational festive celebration to you', the way all the PC madness is going.
:D Chock

Which IMO is disgraceful and disrespectful to Christians. I consider it on the same level as people renaming Hanukkah or Ramadan. Sure people can and should be able to celebrate the holiday in a non-religous manner, that's their business but to take Christ out of Christmas because it will "offend" non Christians is forgetting that in doing so you offend Christians. The PC brigade is too full of themselves to recognise that though. :stare:

[waste gate]

The Golden Compass incites non-Catholics incited by the incitement of Catholics.


:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Why is 'your' dismissiveness anymore foolish?:D

[Chock]

The Golden Compass incites non-Catholics incited by the incitement of Catholics.


:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
LMAO - Actually, since technically, I am still a Roman Catholic, I'm not sure which bit I fit in on with that one, I know, I'll be outraged by the confusion my catholic upbringing has caused, yeah, that'll do:rotfl: Note to self: Get excommunicated

:D Chock

[NEON DEON]

The Golden Compass incites non-Catholics incited by the incitement of Catholics.


:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Why is 'your' dismissiveness anymore foolish?:D


Insightful!:up:

[Skybird]

"I'd be far more offended if I were a polar bear."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7128985.stm


Of course it's to do with the church, but it's so bowdlerised, it's such a cliche of the "evil church," that it just didn't seem relevant really.
The main message was so convoluted, there was no serious atheistic content, and it didn't seem obvious that they [the Magisterium] were religious in a way that I understand it. http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/shared/img/o.gif

Clearly, the Magisterium is meant to represent the Catholic church, but I think the Catholic League in America are really overstepping the mark.

IGOR TORONYI-LALIC, ARTS CRITIC, CATHOLIC HERALD

[Letum]

The Golden Compass incites wasegate incited by the incitement of non-Catholics incited by the incitement of Catholics.

;)

[TteFAboB]

Exciting.

[mrbeast]

I try to convert people to only one thing: reason. what they believe or not, does not trigger me as long as they keep it for themselves, and do not try to enforce it onto others, the state and/or society.

Exactly. I have my beliefs and generally do not speak about them unless prompted for certain reasons. I have no problem with other people either following or not following whatever religion they want, although Scientologists are simply insane, might as well believe in Middle Earth!


In the UK it will soon be: 'Happy non-denominational festive celebration to you', the way all the PC madness is going.
:D Chock

Which IMO is disgraceful and disrespectful to Christians. I consider it on the same level as people renaming Hanukkah or Ramadan. Sure people can and should be able to celebrate the holiday in a non-religous manner, that's their business but to take Christ out of Christmas because it will "offend" non Christians is forgetting that in doing so you offend Christians. The PC brigade is too full of themselves to recognise that though. :stare:



Christmas is not a Christian festival.

Early Christians adopted it in place of several pagan winter festivals to try and popularise Christianity, when they took a break from persecuting pagans that is.

BTW there has never been any attempt to ban Christams or rename it by the 'PC brigade'. Its a kind of seasonal traditon in the UK for the Daily Mail and other newspapers of their ilk to publish scare stories about how the 'PC brigade' wants to ban Christmas.

[Skybird]

In German, Merry Christmas is "Frohe Weihnacht":

froh: happy
Weih: from "weihen", "geweiht sein": to consecrate, to be holy
Nacht: night.

So, "happy consecrated night", or "happy holy night" it would mean.

Happy memories of my childhood days i have for christmas with my family. no matter what, if I would have children, I would celebrate it with them, letting them experience it as a time of wonder and promises, and a precious opportunity in the year when the families comes together and spends a close and caring time together, which also is a value in itself even if the religious background is unimportant for you.

Living alone, and seeing the stress and hectic in the city and the consumer show christmas has turned out to be, the crowds moving like cattle and the commerce and the excessive Kitsch everywhere, I am completely pissed by Christmas these days. So, I spend time with my parents, and meet only the most closest of friends. we have candles, no trees, and on 24th we use to make a "gemütliches" Raclette, just the few of us.

Santa Claus is playing a role and is red only because of a Coca Cola advertizing event many decades ago. The christmas tree is a pagan habit with no relation to christian beliefs.

[nikimcbee]

...yeah, but it's so intertaining:p
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnbVqwV8aw4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gi7uGdCzKIA&feature=related

[Skybird]

...yeah, but it's so intertaining:p
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnbVqwV8aw4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gi7uGdCzKIA&feature=related
that Chevy Chase (it's him, yes?) film is gold! :lol:

[nikimcbee]

...yeah, but it's so intertaining:p
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnbVqwV8aw4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gi7uGdCzKIA&feature=related
that Chevy Chase (it's him, yes?) film is gold! :lol:

yes it is.:smug: I have a low opinion of TV preachers. The other guy is R Lee Emerey(sp) From Full Metal Jacket:|\\

[SUBMAN1]

Well, it is anti-religious. They replaced God from the book with some form of the force to kind of skirt around the fact, but the message to implant the idea in childrens minds (The seed of doubt) that god doesn't exist is still clearly there. The actual book itself is actually an athiests bible to a degree.

Does this help understant the bigger picture now on why the Catholics are having issue with this movie?

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Christmas is not a Christian festival.

Early Christians adopted it in place of several pagan winter festivals to try and popularise Christianity, when they took a break from persecuting pagans that is.

BTW there has never been any attempt to ban Christams or rename it by the 'PC brigade'. Its a kind of seasonal traditon in the UK for the Daily Mail and other newspapers of their ilk to publish scare stories about how the 'PC brigade' wants to ban Christmas.This is a rather amusing statement. :D Christmas / Christ / Not Christian? How could I have been so wrong? :p SInce it happens around the same time of some other pagen tradition, has no bearing on it not being Christian. That is pure coincidence.

This teaching that someone gave you is probably an atheist teaching, but make no mistake, you are celebrating the birth of Christ.

-S

[VipertheSniper]

Christmas is not a Christian festival.

Early Christians adopted it in place of several pagan winter festivals to try and popularise Christianity, when they took a break from persecuting pagans that is.

BTW there has never been any attempt to ban Christams or rename it by the 'PC brigade'. Its a kind of seasonal traditon in the UK for the Daily Mail and other newspapers of their ilk to publish scare stories about how the 'PC brigade' wants to ban Christmas.This is a rather amusing statement. :D Christmas / Christ / Not Christian? How could I have been so wrong? :p SInce it happens around the same time of some other pagen tradition, has no bearing on it not being Christian. That is pure coincidence.

This teaching that someone gave you is probably an atheist teaching, but make no mistake, you are celebrating the birth of Christ.

-S

Sure we're celebrating the birth of Christ, that doesn't change the fact that the time in which we celebrate his birth was the time of pagan winterfestivities in more than one cult at that time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas_tree
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas

[Skybird]

Well, it is anti-religious.
the book is not anti-religious, it is "anti" the institutional theistic religions, and theior abuse for social control and powerpolitics. And that is something different. Theists often claim that a religion is only a religion if it teaches to blindly believe in a deity without asking questions about it, a deity that never is there, never gives any evidence of is existence; is, remains to be and always has been unproven, untested, unfounded. You could as well believe in the magic power of red bicycles. In fact, such theists implicitly conclude that there can only be one religion, one belief, and one deity: theirs.

Why such people, when they make a public appearance with their views, think they must take it upon them to defend God when God by their own descriptions should be expected to be able to take care of his business all by himself, always has been beyond me. they invent arguments to show how clever they are, and claim it is some god's argument, and they deliver sanctions and penalties and say it ois a god's sanction and penalty, and they impose their will and interests onto others and say it is some god'S will and interest. and when one reists to them, they complain about being limited in their freedom, and others not sharing their views having no morals. It seems that their god is more a placeholder for people's private believes that they want impose on others, and serves as an excuse to stick their nose into other people's private affairs. no independant deity: but a figurehead at the bow of man's ships.


They replaced God from the book with some form of the force to kind of skirt around the fact, but the message to implant the idea in childrens minds (The seed of doubt) that god doesn't exist is still clearly there.
And why is that worse than implant that something unproven like a god does exist in children's mind? I call that child abuse.

Let children grow, play and learn according to their interests, talents and abilities, by that they form an asking mind all by themselves - and not before they are ripe to deal with the answers they find. And just believing is not a satisfying answers for everybody.

Does this help understant the bigger picture now on why the Catholics are having issue with this movie?
"The" Catholics...? Above, I just have quoted the catholic critic of a Catholic newspaper saying that the movie is not anti-religious at all, that he sees no insult in it, and that the catholic league in America is exaggerating it.

But the book encourages use of one's own brain and independant thinking, and that is something that religious dogmatists always try to prevent to protect their own powerpolitical interests and control over people's minds, and save them from the possebility that they eventually would find out that they had been wrong in their beliefs all the time. what they say is: leave me alone, I do not wish to chnage myself, and for that purpose i want you to become like me so that no more doubts remain that could challenge my beliefs. It is like that in Islam. And it is like that with the churches and fundamental christians as well.

[SUBMAN1]

Sure we're celebrating the birth of Christ, that doesn't change the fact that the time in which we celebrate his birth was the time of pagan winterfestivities in more than one cult at that time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas_tree
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChristmasDon't use WIkipedia for fact. This is not even allowed on colleges for fact finding or research. As far as I know, this is written by a Pagen or Athiest to promote their agenda.

Just because it happens at the same time has nothing to do with the fact it is celebrated.

What you should be reading here is that some pegan traditions that happened to be going on at the same time were brought into Christmas, not the other way around. THere didn't used to be a tree, or such if you study the subject.

-S

[Ishmael]

Bruce Cockburn expressed this idea much more eloquently than I some years back in a tune called, "Gospel Of Bondage".


Tabloids, bellowing raw delight
Hail the return of the Teutonic Knights
Inbred for purity and spoiling for a fight,
Another little puppet of the New Right

See-through dollars and mystery plagues
Varied detritus of Aquarian Age
Shutters on storefronts and shutters in the mind -
We kill ourselves to keep ourselves safe from crime.
That's the gospel of bondage...

We're so afraid of disorder we make it into a god
We can only placate with state security laws
Whose church consists of secret courts and wiretaps and shocks
Whose priests hold smoking guns, and whose sign is the double cross
But God must be on the side of the side that's right
And not the right that justifies itself in terms of might -
Least of all a bunch of neo-nazis running hooded through the night
Which may be why He's so consipicuously out of sight
Of the gospel of bondage...

You read the Bible in your special ways
You're fond of quoting certain things it says -
Mouth full of righteousness and wrath from above
But when do we hear about forgiveness and love?

Sometimes you can hear the Spirit whispering to you,
But if God stays silent, what else can you do
Except listen to the silence? if you ever did you'd surely see
That God won't be reduced to an ideology
Such as the gospel of bondage...


Besides, here's the real "War On Christmas"

http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/4149/nl009dec1970io6.jpg


It kind of reminds me of when Dogma came out and these guys were demonstrating against it. Kevin Smith, the director, went and participated in the demonstration against his own film just for fun.

[SUBMAN1]

Well, it is anti-religious. the book is not anti-religious, it is "anti" the institutional theistic religions, and theior abuse for social control and powerpolitics. And that is something different. Theists often claim that a religion is only a religion if it teaches to blindly believe in a deity without asking questions about it, a deity that never is there, never gives any evidence of is existence; is, remains to be and always has been unproven, untested, unfounded. You could as well believe in the magic power of red bicycles. In fact, such theists implicitly conclude that there can only be one religion, one belief, and one deity: theirs.

Why such people, when they make a public appearance with their views, think they must take it upon them to defend God when God by their own descriptions should be expected to be able to take care of his business all by himself, always has been beyond me. they invent arguments to show how clever they are, and claim it is some god's argument, and they deliver sanctions and penalties and say it ois a god's sanction and penalty, and they impose their will and interests onto others and say it is some god'S will and interest. and when one reists to them, they complain about being limited in their freedom, and others not sharing their views having no morals. It seems that their god is more a placeholder for people's private believes that they want impose on others, and serves as an excuse to stick their nose into other people's private affairs. no independant deity: but a figurehead at the bow of man's ships.


They replaced God from the book with some form of the force to kind of skirt around the fact, but the message to implant the idea in childrens minds (The seed of doubt) that god doesn't exist is still clearly there. And why is that worse than implant that something unproven like a god does exist in children's mind? I call that child abuse.

Let children grow, play and learn according to their interests, talents and abilities, by that they form an asking mind all by themselves - and not before they are ripe to deal with the answers they find. And just believing is not a satisfying answers for everybody.

Does this help understant the bigger picture now on why the Catholics are having issue with this movie? "The" Catholics...? Above, I just have quoted the catholic critic of a Catholic newspaper saying that the movie is not anti-religious at all, that he sees no insult in it, and that the catholic league in America is exaggerating it.

But the book encourages use of one's own brain and independant thinking, and that is something that religious dogmatists always try to prevent to protect their own powerpolitical interests and control over people's minds, and save them from the possebility that they eventually would find out that they had been wrong in their beliefs all the time. what they say is: leave me alone, I do not wish to chnage myself, and for that purpose i want you to become like me so that no more doubts remain that could challenge my beliefs. It is like that in Islam. And it is like that with the churches and fundamental christians as well.Thanks Skybird - you made my point completely. It is called 'seeds of doubt' in everything religious, like I describe above. It is a direct Atheist attack on the church in any form. How you could be more atheist with such an attack is beyond me. There is no way to explain it away, since the proof is in your writing. Read what you wrote!

-S

[Skybird]

Thanks Skybird - you made my point completely. It is called 'seeds of doubt' in everything religious, like I describe above. It is a direct Atheist attack on the church in any form. How you could be more atheist with such an attack is beyond me. There is no way to explain it away, since the proof is in your writing. Read what you wrote!

-S

I never have hidden to not believe in theistic dogmas, gods, deities, whatever. I have frankly admitted several times to be spiritual, but atheist.

It's also wellknown by now that I attack religious dogmas that try to impose themselves on others, and attack the churches as well.

So what is your point in stating the obvious?

[Letum]

How much Christmas has it's roots in pagan tradition is totally academic.

It was declared to fall on Dec.25 in about 350AD.

This isn't likely to be the date of Christ's birth because the Bible describes events that
didn't take place in winter such as shepherds out with their flocks.
Perhaps the bible isn't a very reliable source for this kind of information, but it is the
best we have.

So why did the pope chose Dec.25?
Well, at that time, the vast majority of people under the pope's political influence
where still pagan. Declaring Christ's birth to fall on the same day as a popular pagan
festival made the transition to Christianity easier for these people. It was a sensible
date to pick and without doubt it helped Christianity spread faster.

Bits of pagan tradition, such as trees and door-to-door carol singing where also picked up.


All that said, the festival can be about what ever you want it to be about.
If you decide to celebrate it as the birth of Christ, then it is the birth of Christ.
If you decide to celebrate it as a pagan festival, then it is a pagan festival.
If you decide to celebrate it as beer drinking contest, then it is a beer drinking contest.

No one form of celebration owns any date in the calender.

[mrbeast]

Christmas is not a Christian festival.

Early Christians adopted it in place of several pagan winter festivals to try and popularise Christianity, when they took a break from persecuting pagans that is.

BTW there has never been any attempt to ban Christams or rename it by the 'PC brigade'. Its a kind of seasonal traditon in the UK for the Daily Mail and other newspapers of their ilk to publish scare stories about how the 'PC brigade' wants to ban Christmas.This is a rather amusing statement. :D Christmas / Christ / Not Christian? How could I have been so wrong? :p SInce it happens around the same time of some other pagen tradition, has no bearing on it not being Christian. That is pure coincidence.

This teaching that someone gave you is probably an atheist teaching, but make no mistake, you are celebrating the birth of Christ.

-S

Where in the bible does it say to celebrate Christ's birth on Dec 25th?

SUBMAN1, you seem very paranoid of about 'seeds of doubt' being sown, what is it about atheism that you find so threatening? Is it the fact that atheism is based on rational thought and logic?

[Skybird]

So why did the pope chose Dec.25?
Well, at that time, the vast majority of people under the pope's political influence
where still pagan. Declaring Christ's birth to fall on the same day as a popular pagan
festival made the transition to Christianity easier for these people. It was a sensible
date to pick and without doubt it helped Christianity spread faster.

Never thought aboiut it thta way, but I think you could be right. It reminds me of the situation in germany: we celebrate the day of German unity over here, on 3rd Octobre. And since some years, it was decided to have open day at mosques on the very same date: 3rd Octobre.

And some protestant clerics recommend that the church should celebrate Eastern together with I think it was Muhammad's birthday in the Christian churches. Strange enough, to my knowledge nobody recommended to celebrate Eastern in mosques.

[VipertheSniper]

Sure we're celebrating the birth of Christ, that doesn't change the fact that the time in which we celebrate his birth was the time of pagan winterfestivities in more than one cult at that time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas_tree
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChristmasDon't use WIkipedia for fact. This is not even allowed on colleges for fact finding or research. As far as I know, this is written by a Pagen or Athiest to promote their agenda.

Just because it happens at the same time has nothing to do with the fact it is celebrated.

What the heck... Are you paranoid or something, seeing pagans and atheists around every corner? Did you even read the links? The part about the Roots of the Christmas tree is straight out of the Encyclopedia Brittanica, which I would hardly consider written by pagans or atheists


What you should be reading here is that some pegan traditions that happened to be going on at the same time were brought into Christmas, not the other way around. THere didn't used to be a tree, or such if you study the subject.

-S

Did I say something else? Where did I say that Christmas was brought into the pagan traditions... I think you're reading too much into my words. I guess I overread "That is pure coincidence." in your earlier post which I replied to first, would I have read that I wouldn't even have commented.

Edit: Just because it isn't allowed on college or university to cite wikipedia doesn't mean that there's absolutely no truth in it, PLUS you can always edit the entry if you think it is wrong...
If I did have the time to look up books over books for simple forum replies, I'd do it, but I leave that to you, thank you. I wait for your well funded reply in say 6 months or so... please with links to the sources cited. ;)

[Letum]

Strange enough, to my knowledge nobody recommended to celebrate Eastern in mosques.

Perhaps that has something to do with Easter already being celebrated in mosques. ;)
It is usually to have a special meal and a ceremony in the mosque to remember the last supper.

[mrbeast]

Strange enough, to my knowledge nobody recommended to celebrate Eastern in mosques.

Perhaps that has something to do with Easter already being celebrated in mosques. ;)
It is usually to have a special meal and a ceremony in the mosque to remember the last supper.

Something that people often forget is that Jesus is mentioned in the Koran and is regarded as a prophet by muslims. :know:

[Skybird]

Strange enough, to my knowledge nobody recommended to celebrate Eastern in mosques.

Perhaps that has something to do with Easter already being celebrated in mosques. ;)
It is usually to have a special meal and a ceremony in the mosque to remember the last supper.

Something that people often forget is that Jesus is mentioned in the Koran and is regarded as a prophet by muslims. :know:
Yes. So what? Next you tell me both men taught the same things, or what? Try to have a Christian mass in a mosque and see what happened. It was suggested in Germany. Islamic speaker said the idea was difficult, and it would be easier to celebrate Muhammad's birthday in churches, that would be "tolerant". the mass in a mosque never took place. Location: Berlin, time: last year.

[Letum]

Strange enough, to my knowledge nobody recommended to celebrate Eastern in mosques.

Perhaps that has something to do with Easter already being celebrated in mosques. ;)
It is usually to have a special meal and a ceremony in the mosque to remember the last supper.
Something that people often forget is that Jesus is mentioned in the Koran and is regarded as a prophet by muslims. :know: Yes. So what? Next you tell me both men taught the same things [...]


Whoooh there SB! Steady up, no need for a rant.
I was just explaining why "nobody recommended to celebrate Easter in mosques".
I wasn't making any further religious or political point.

No doubt I will in the future; then you will have you chance to tell me that Islam is
fundamentally evil and must be exterminated for the sake of world peace (and all
other such nincompoop).

[Konovalov]

Strange enough, to my knowledge nobody recommended to celebrate Eastern in mosques.

Perhaps that has something to do with Easter already being celebrated in mosques. ;)
It is usually to have a special meal and a ceremony in the mosque to remember the last supper.
Something that people often forget is that Jesus is mentioned in the Koran and is regarded as a prophet by muslims. :know: Yes. So what? Next you tell me both men taught the same things [...]


Whoooh there SB! Steady up, no need for a rant.
I was just explaining why "nobody recommended to celebrate Easter in mosques".
I wasn't making any further religious or political point.

No doubt I will in the future; then you will have you chance to tell me that Islam is
fundamentally evil and must be exterminated for the sake of world peace (and all
other such nincompoop).

Well said. :yep:

Nincompoop. Now there is a word you don't see used much. :doh:

[Skybird]

I doubt that Muslims celebrate Christian Eastern in mosques, Letum. and an update: some weeks ago the first two church-buildings in berlin, though not of the major Protestant or catholic chrcuh, have been sold, and bought by the berlin Islamic community. they are currently being turned into mosques. sp forgive if I am a little bit sensible about such things. But I strayed off a bit too far from the original issue - for that my apology. Initially, I only wanted to hint at the day of German unity, and open day at mosques being choosen at the same date, and that this remindes of what you said about paganism and the Decembre date of Christmas.

[Fish]

The Roman Catholic priests have something of a reputation for messing with choir boys :D Chock

Right.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/bal-mahony1205,0,4759925.story

[waste gate]

The Roman Catholic priests have something of a reputation for messing with choir boys :D Chock

Right.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/bal-mahony1205,0,4759925.story

Keep it in perspective guys. How many sex offenders aren't priests?

[SUBMAN1]

Sure we're celebrating the birth of Christ, that doesn't change the fact that the time in which we celebrate his birth was the time of pagan winterfestivities in more than one cult at that time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas_tree
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChristmasDon't use WIkipedia for fact. This is not even allowed on colleges for fact finding or research. As far as I know, this is written by a Pagen or Athiest to promote their agenda.

Just because it happens at the same time has nothing to do with the fact it is celebrated.
What the heck... Are you paranoid or something, seeing pagans and atheists around every corner? Did you even read the links? The part about the Roots of the Christmas tree is straight out of the Encyclopedia Brittanica, which I would hardly consider written by pagans or atheists


What you should be reading here is that some pegan traditions that happened to be going on at the same time were brought into Christmas, not the other way around. THere didn't used to be a tree, or such if you study the subject.

-S
Did I say something else? Where did I say that Christmas was brought into the pagan traditions... I think you're reading too much into my words. I guess I overread "That is pure coincidence." in your earlier post which I replied to first, would I have read that I wouldn't even have commented.

Edit: Just because it isn't allowed on college or university to cite wikipedia doesn't mean that there's absolutely no truth in it, PLUS you can always edit the entry if you think it is wrong...
If I did have the time to look up books over books for simple forum replies, I'd do it, but I leave that to you, thank you. I wait for your well funded reply in say 6 months or so... please with links to the sources cited. ;)Maybe I've got you backwards. Sorry for misreading what you wrote.

By the way, why I am being so direct is because of the militant atheism around here. So I come on strong because I know the replies will be stronger. You might say we've had these discussions before here. :)

-S

[Letum]

[see above]

np :up:

The ascension of Christ to Allah is a important date in the Islamic calender and it
happens at the start of christian Easter. There are no big celebrations, but it is
certainly a red letter day. After all, Jesus is mentioned in the Quran far more often than
Mohamed and performs several miracles (and all other such nincompoop).

In short the differences are:
1) Ascension to Allah instead of crucifixion.
2) No death and resurrection.
3) Event overshadowed by more important celebrations.

[Tchocky]

Someone - The juxtaposition of Christmas and pagan celebrations is just a coincidence.
Tchock - No, it isn't.

Ende :p

Oh, and the idea of an atheist bible is rib-ticklingy rofflicious.

[Reaves]

Christmas is not a Christian festival.

Early Christians adopted it in place of several pagan winter festivals to try and popularise Christianity, when they took a break from persecuting pagans that is.

BTW there has never been any attempt to ban Christams or rename it by the 'PC brigade'. Its a kind of seasonal traditon in the UK for the Daily Mail and other newspapers of their ilk to publish scare stories about how the 'PC brigade' wants to ban Christmas.

The anti Christian sentiment is strong with this one.

You say there hasn't been an attempt to ban Christmas I'm sorry that is complete B.S, at least over here.

There is a store here called Myer, it used to be owned by Grace Brothers so if your UK you should know what it is. Every year for decades they have had Christmas windows with the nativity scene and other things like Santa. The last few years has seen a lack of both baby Jesus and fat boy Santa.

Schools are no longer allowed to sing Christmas carrols like 'silent night' and 'three kings.' Local councils used to have nativity scenes setup in certain areas along with Christmas decorations. This doesn't happen anymore which I think is sad.

[Reaves]

Someone - The juxtaposition of Christmas and pagan celebrations is just a coincidence.
Tchock - No, it isn't.

Ende :p

Oh, and the idea of an atheist bible is rib-ticklingy rofflicious.


Even Santa Claus is taken from pagan celebrations. How better to gain people to your shiny new faith then with a holiday festival?

[Tchocky]

Someone - The juxtaposition of Christmas and pagan celebrations is just a coincidence.
Tchock - No, it isn't.

Ende :p

Oh, and the idea of an atheist bible is rib-ticklingy rofflicious.

Even Santa Claus is taken from pagan celebrations. How better to gain people to your shiny new faith then with a holiday festival?
Yeah, the holiday is a rather interesting mash-up between solstice/winter festivals, and religious conversion. That doesn't mean that it isn't a Christian festival, though, it only grounds the origin in reality rather than closed-mindedness. No harm, no foul.

As regards the "War on Christmas" stuff, I can't see any overarching attempt by anyone to denigrate Christmas, more a graduated effort by single people/businesses to move away from solely religious holidays. I mean, it's not just Christians that take time off in December.
The idea of a publicly celebrated religious holiday is bizarre, surely faith is irrevocably personal and incommunicable, so what does it matter if someone says "Happy holidays" and not "Happy Christmas"?
small fry indeed

[Letum]

There is a store here called Myer, it used to be owned by Grace Brothers so if your UK you should know what it is. Every year for decades they have had Christmas windows with the nativity scene and other things like Santa. The last few years has seen a lack of both baby Jesus and fat boy Santa.

Strange, being a shop, I assume they have made this change for comercial y sound reasons.

If Christmass is anything, it is a comercial thing!

[Reaves]

As regards the "War on Christmas" stuff, I can't see any overarching attempt by anyone to denigrate Christmas, more a graduated effort by single people/businesses to move away from solely religious holidays. I mean, it's not just Christians that take time off in December.
The idea of a publicly celebrated religious holiday is bizarre, surely faith is irrevocably personal and incommunicable, so what does it matter if someone says "Happy holidays" and not "Happy Christmas"?
small fry indeed

I guess my problem with it is that i've always known Christmas as that and not the 'holiday season.' I find reverting to 'happy holidays' instead of 'merry christmas' as shallow and pointless as you certainly don't have to be a church goer to say merry Christmas. I don't know about your countries but Australia will soon have the attitude with government and schools that the word Christmas will not be allowed as it may offend people. I just find that absurd and cannot agree with it hence I kick and scream.

It's just something that annoys me, the more I think about it the more I understand my point is kind of meek although it doesn't change my opionion.

[Stealth Hunter]

Well here we go again.

"The League’s president, William Donohue, has criticised The Golden Compass, which stars Nicole Kidman, Daniel Craig, and Dakota Blue Richards, as being anti-religious."


http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/article2999647.ece


At least Donohue has not called for the producer of the film to be burned at the stake.

So it's OK for religious idiots to complain about those who oppose them, but it's not OK is disagree with the religious idiots to begin with?:roll:

I hate utterly every religion on Earth at this point (except for the Jews and Buddhists).

[Letum]

:huh: Wow

[SUBMAN1]

Well here we go again.

"The League’s president, William Donohue, has criticised The Golden Compass, which stars Nicole Kidman, Daniel Craig, and Dakota Blue Richards, as being anti-religious."


http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/article2999647.ece


At least Donohue has not called for the producer of the film to be burned at the stake.
So it's OK for religious idiots to complain about those who oppose them, but it's not OK is disagree with the religious idiots to begin with?:roll:

I hate utterly every religion on Earth at this point (except for the Jews and Buddhists).Even the well known militant athiest authors write that there is a 1 and 7 chance that god is real. So, given that, why the hate?

And then you might come back and say, given the 1 in 7 it is true, which one is right? This would be an excellent question. Christianity? Islam? Buddist? Hindu? any other religion? The answer is simple. Look at the building blocks - all but one is based on the priciples of man - which is obedience, and only one out of all of them is based on a much higher power that is not thought of by simple man. In my opinion, you can take your obedience and shove it, since that is simply serving a tyrrant and death would be a blessing. One however makes you want to strive to achieve betterment.

I cannot say that man won't seek to control any idea, but I can say that you will be able to see through the farce given that you see the truth. The rest is for you to figure out however. I am of strong belief to not twist the minds of those that are unwilling to come in a particular direction given the evidence, but I am happy to show them the way if they are willing. Hate for the rest of your life if you must, but keep in the back of your mind that at any time you can change that hate. Unlike any other false religion, you have a choice and it is a choice you make for yourself. If you hate for the rest of your life, do not worry because god will not break your legs as punishment like some people think, but simply wait for you in earnest.

I've said my peace. The rest is yours.

-S

[NEON DEON]

When I was a Catholic school boy growing up in New Orleans, I remember the church banning a few movies. One of them that comes to mind is "Barbarella"

I think it might of been because Jane Fonda's rack appeared thru a plexiglass garment. :()1:

Might of been a few other things that set the Archbishop off, but as a boy thats what I remember.


Anyways, the movie was considered racey in the 60's.

[Skybird]

Christmas is not a Christian festival.

Early Christians adopted it in place of several pagan winter festivals to try and popularise Christianity, when they took a break from persecuting pagans that is.

BTW there has never been any attempt to ban Christams or rename it by the 'PC brigade'. Its a kind of seasonal traditon in the UK for the Daily Mail and other newspapers of their ilk to publish scare stories about how the 'PC brigade' wants to ban Christmas.

The anti Christian sentiment is strong with this one.

You say there hasn't been an attempt to ban Christmas I'm sorry that is complete B.S, at least over here.

There is a store here called Myer, it used to be owned by Grace Brothers so if your UK you should know what it is. Every year for decades they have had Christmas windows with the nativity scene and other things like Santa. The last few years has seen a lack of both baby Jesus and fat boy Santa.

Schools are no longer allowed to sing Christmas carrols like 'silent night' and 'three kings.' Local councils used to have nativity scenes setup in certain areas along with Christmas decorations. This doesn't happen anymore which I think is sad.

Boah... I seem to remember to have read that something like this was in the planning for Britain, public decorations not allowed anymore or something like that, but you in Down Under, too...?

[Skybird]

I hate utterly every religion on Earth at this point (except for the Jews and Buddhists).
:lol: That's a combo! Your reasons? Just curious. I would not get both together.

[Skybird]

:nope:

Even the well known militant athiest authors write that there is a 1 and 7 chance that god is real. So, given that, why the hate?

One of the "well known militant athiest authors" is Cristopher Hitchens. He separates atheists from anti-theists. the first, according to him, say they don't know and don't care if gods exist, but that they do not believe in them, the latter say they are certain that gods do not exist. So when you say "authors" and use plural and implicitly have described a majority, you better make clear if you mean them to be atheists, or anti-theists. In Hitchen's sense, just if you had me on mind, I am anti-theist, of course, like Hitchens sees himself, too, while Pat Condell is an atheist.

nd then you might come back and say, given the 1 in 7 it is true, which one is right? This would be an excellent question. Christianity? Islam? Buddist? Hindu? any other religion? The answer is simple. Look at the building blocks - all but one is based on the priciples of man - which is obedience, and only one out of all of them is based on a much higher power that is not thought of by simple man.
A statement that in itself already is a thought of by simple man again. ;)

In my opinion, you can take your obedience and shove it, since that is simply serving a tyrrant and death would be a blessing. One however makes you want to strive to achieve betterment.
regarding that "one", you must talk of "reason" and "empiric experience", no doubt.

I cannot say that man won't seek to control any idea, but I can say that you will be able to see through the farce given that you see the truth.
A statement that the Islamic terrorist and the Christian fundamentalist and the Buddhist and the Hindu and the Jew all agree to. :hmm: That is not 1 of 7, but 5 of 5!

The rest is for you to figure out however. I am of strong belief to not twist the minds of those that are unwilling to come in a particular direction given the evidence,
"Suggestive language...!" :nope: :lol:

but I am happy to show them the way if they are willing.
Are we ready for you? I must ask God about that when I have reached him.

Hate for the rest of your life if you must, but keep in the back of your mind that at any time you can change that hate. Unlike any other false religion
That are...?

you have a choice and it is a choice you make for yourself.
Relief - finally something I can agree upon without making a joke of it.

If you hate for the rest of your life, do not worry because god will not break your legs as punishment like some people think, but simply wait for you in earnest.

I've said my peace. The rest is yours.

Thank God!

-----

Do you know why I make mockery of your posting, Subman? Because you try hard to give the impression to act on behalf of the best interest of the guy you adress, and others reading this, and that you know the one, the only, the right way. but the truth is: you want to make others believe - just that: believe - in what you say, and what you believe yourself. Your cause is neither altruism nor humanism or "agape", nor religious experience, nor any god: your only cause is - you, your boosting ego, your view, your dogma. Granted, you do not take a club to impose yourself on other's minds, but you try to lure them by speaking with a tongue of silk and honey.

"...I am happy to show them the way..." "those that are unwilling to come to a particular direction given the evidence", - boy oh boy, if I ever would have said something like that or even would have behaved and acted by these mottos in those years I taught people the tools of meditation, or if I ever would have claimed to teach the one, the only religion, or religion at all, or the only Skybird-approved way to enlightenment - I would have felt deeply ashamed. and that's what you should feel like when doing such speeches, Subman. Before others will be ready for you, you need to be ready for them - and that is something that you are not, my friend. Not even half the way.

You are to self-centred, man. Before you could show others a way, in the end claiming leadership by that, you need to loose yourself. and regarding that, a lot of work remains to get done for you. You are too full of yourself.

that is why I make mockery of your posting. It is a serious issue you are doing. Because you do damage to those people's innocent interest that eventually dare to "believe" you, and believing is all you have to offer: no knowledge, no insight, no experience, no direct, immediate perception of reality, only: believing, that is your only offer, untested, unchecked, unexamined, unproven. That's what they call "false prophets" - they only lead the path towards the next treadmill, at best, the next running oval - or even the next swamp. you want to show people a way? It is more likely that you do not have a clue what you are talking of, and what a burden/responsibility that would be.

"Keep thy religion to thyself."

[mrbeast]

Well said Skybird!

Its interesting, Subman, that you haven't answered the question that I put to you several posts ago........What is it about atheism that you find so threatening?

The answer, I think, lies in the fact that when religion is analysed under even the lightest of scrutiny, the farce shows itself up.

As to banning Christmas, I don't know of any tide of schools banning carols or nativety plays. At the moment I'm sitting in work just a stones throw from a town centre which is full of Christmas decorations, shop windows decorated for Christmas. There are no rules against local councils putting on Christmas functions and events. The town where I live has a big council run celebration when the Christmas lights are switched on. The TV is full of Christmas........I could go on. I don't see where the notion that Christmas is being banned comes from? Certainly the UK still has plenty of Christmas.

If anything its getting bigger!

[SUBMAN1]

Well said Skybird!

Its interesting, Subman, that you haven't answered the question that I put to you several posts ago........What is it about atheism that you find so threatening?

The answer, I think, lies in the fact that when religion is analysed under even the lightest of scrutiny, the farce shows itself up.

As to banning Christmas, I don't know of any tide of schools banning carols or nativety plays. At the moment I'm sitting in work just a stones throw from a town centre which is full of Christmas decorations, shop windows decorated for Christmas. There are no rules against local councils putting on Christmas functions and events. The town where I live has a big council run celebration when the Christmas lights are switched on. The TV is full of Christmas........I could go on. I don't see where the notion that Christmas is being banned comes from? Certainly the UK still has plenty of Christmas.

If anything its getting bigger!



I don't find atheist threatening. I do find the current breed of what are called militant atheists to be in your face. These are the ones I find annoying. THey are worse than Bin Laden. THis is my problem. I hate religious people that are in my face, and I hate anti-religious people that are in my face. It is fine to believe what you want, but keep your wants to twist my mind to your ideals to yourself please.

Thanks,

-S

PS. Is that a fair assesment of the situation?
PS. Fair enough

[SUBMAN1]

:nope:

Even the well known militant athiest authors write that there is a 1 and 7 chance that god is real. So, given that, why the hate?
One of the "well known militant athiest authors" is Cristopher Hitchens. He separates atheists from anti-theists. the first, according to him, say they don't know and don't care if gods exist, but that they do not believe in them, the latter say they are certain that gods do not exist. So when you say "authors" and use plural and implicitly have described a majority, you better make clear if you mean them to be atheists, or anti-theists. In Hitchen's sense, just if you had me on mind, I am anti-theist, of course, like Hitchens sees himself, too, while Pat Condell is an atheist.

nd then you might come back and say, given the 1 in 7 it is true, which one is right? This would be an excellent question. Christianity? Islam? Buddist? Hindu? any other religion? The answer is simple. Look at the building blocks - all but one is based on the priciples of man - which is obedience, and only one out of all of them is based on a much higher power that is not thought of by simple man. A statement that in itself already is a thought of by simple man again. ;)

In my opinion, you can take your obedience and shove it, since that is simply serving a tyrrant and death would be a blessing. One however makes you want to strive to achieve betterment. regarding that "one", you must talk of "reason" and "empiric experience", no doubt.

I cannot say that man won't seek to control any idea, but I can say that you will be able to see through the farce given that you see the truth. A statement that the Islamic terrorist and the Christian fundamentalist and the Buddhist and the Hindu and the Jew all agree to. :hmm: That is not 1 of 7, but 5 of 5!

The rest is for you to figure out however. I am of strong belief to not twist the minds of those that are unwilling to come in a particular direction given the evidence, "Suggestive language...!" :nope: :lol:

but I am happy to show them the way if they are willing. Are we ready for you? I must ask God about that when I have reached him.

Hate for the rest of your life if you must, but keep in the back of your mind that at any time you can change that hate. Unlike any other false religion That are...?

you have a choice and it is a choice you make for yourself. Relief - finally something I can agree upon without making a joke of it.

If you hate for the rest of your life, do not worry because god will not break your legs as punishment like some people think, but simply wait for you in earnest.

I've said my peace. The rest is yours.
Thank God!

-----

Do you know why I make mockery of your posting, Subman? Because you try hard to give the impression to act on behalf of the best interest of the guy you adress, and others reading this, and that you know the one, the only, the right way. but the truth is: you want to make others believe - just that: believe - in what you say, and what you believe yourself. Your cause is neither altruism nor humanism or "agape", nor religious experience, nor any god: your only cause is - you, your boosting ego, your view, your dogma. Granted, you do not take a club to impose yourself on other's minds, but you try to lure them by speaking with a tongue of silk and honey.

"...I am happy to show them the way..." "those that are unwilling to come to a particular direction given the evidence", - boy oh boy, if I ever would have said something like that or even would have behaved and acted by these mottos in those years I taught people the tools of meditation, or if I ever would have claimed to teach the one, the only religion, or religion at all, or the only Skybird-approved way to enlightenment - I would have felt deeply ashamed. and that's what you should feel like when doing such speeches, Subman. Before others will be ready for you, you need to be ready for them - and that is something that you are not, my friend. Not even half the way.

You are to self-centred, man. Before you could show others a way, in the end claiming leadership by that, you need to loose yourself. and regarding that, a lot of work remains to get done for you. You are too full of yourself.

that is why I make mockery of your posting. It is a serious issue you are doing. Because you do damage to those people's innocent interest that eventually dare to "believe" you, and believing is all you have to offer: no knowledge, no insight, no experience, no direct, immediate perception of reality, only: believing, that is your only offer, untested, unchecked, unexamined, unproven. That's what they call "false prophets" - they only lead the path towards the next treadmill, at best, the next running oval - or even the next swamp. you want to show people a way? It is more likely that you do not have a clue what you are talking of, and what a burden/responsibility that would be.

"Keep thy religion to thyself."This is why I will not respond to your childish mockery. Get out of kindergarten already.

-S

[August]

but the truth is: you want to make others believe - just that: believe - in what you say, and what you believe yourself. Your cause is neither altruism nor humanism or "agape", nor religious experience, nor any god: your only cause is - you, your boosting ego, your view, your dogma.


This is a classic case of the pot calling the kettle black here folks.

[DeepIron]

The whole argument is simple:

The Christ taught no theology... Think about it. Where, in the ministry of Jesus of Nazareth, does he describe the theology and dogma of Catholics, Baptists, 7th Day Adventists, Methodists, <insert Western Christian Religion Here>?

He doesn't.

[Skybird]

The whole argument is simple:

The Christ taught no theology... Think about it. Where, in the minitry of Jesus of Nazareth, does he describe the theology and dogma of Catholics, Baptists, 7th Day Adventists, Methodists, <insert Western Christian Religion Here>?

He doesn't.
Exactly.

This thread has motivated me to buy the books a second time (somehow i lost them, don't know when and why), so that I finally - finally! - could read the third part.

Subsim-Amazon-button: beware! ;) :lol:

[DeepIron]

BTW, speakng of books, I'd like to recommend one: "The Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel. An excellent read by a former self-professed atheist and his search for factual evidence concerning the Christ.

A very good read. :up:

[Letum]

The whole argument is simple:

The Christ taught no theology... Think about it. Where, in the minitry of Jesus of Nazareth, does he describe the theology and dogma of Catholics, Baptists, 7th Day Adventists, Methodists, <insert Western Christian Religion Here>?

He doesn't. Exactly.

This thread has motivated me to buy the books a second time (somehow i lost them, don't know when and why), so that I finally - finally! - could read the third part.

Subsim-Amazon-button: beware! ;) :lol:
I got a little bored about the 3rd one and never got round to reading it.

The first was grand tho.

[NEON DEON]

Phew!

This thread has slipped away from an approaching holy war and turned into----

THE BOOK OF THE MONTH CLUB!

:rock:

[Skybird]

Phew!

This thread has slipped away from an approaching holy war and turned into----

THE BOOK OF THE MONTH CLUB!

:rock:
At least some Fantasy fans would even think of it as the book of the decade! :lol: