OT: The Theology Thread

[I am Defecting]

actually your not far off, although its no less true

 

I didn't mean to offend you at all with the editing.  I'm an admirer.  

 

One of the pitfalls that I've encountered posting here, is that this place is not a literary review.  It's actually a hockey message board.  Also, to my great displeasure, and inconvenience, the general postership does not value style over substance, if you know what I mean - I mean that your stylistic choices may not mean what you intend, or will be lost in translation.

 

I've earned a bunch of warning points and proudly served multiple bannings trying to convert the herded masses.  I'm telling you that we've got a place now.  A home.  We've got a thread of our own.  It's not just me that carved out this niche.  It's posters like Physics, X Benedict, GoDD. PA, and there are lots of others who it's politically inconvenient to mention, but Andrew Amerk.  Even Hopeful Future played a part in the society that you now proudly (I hope) join.  We've got a Schizophrenic Thread now, brother, and you'll NEVER be banned there, if I have anything to say about it.   :pirate:

[Neo]

Mr. Drunkard, if you're so inclined .....

 

Your views on The Pledge of Allegience and "In God We Trust" on currency ... "So help me God", etc. ... would interest me from the point of view not based on establishment or separation.

 

Sincere inquiry to a man of one belief bombarded at the state level with so many messages. I'm not setting up a challenge, I'm asking to "feel your shoes".

 

We debate the most obvious displays (crèches, trees) - what about the numerous others?

Edited September 9, 2015 by Neo

[Drunkard]

Mr. Drunkard, if you're so inclined .....

 

Your views on The Pledge of Allegience and "In God We Trust" on currency ... "So help me God", etc. ... would interest me from the point of view not based on establishment or separation.

 

Sincere inquiry to a man of one belief bombarded at the state level with so many messages. I'm not setting up a challenge, I'm asking to "feel your shoes".

 

We debate the most obvious displays (crèches, trees) - what about the numerous others?

Neo,

 

I'm happy to oblige, sir. I disagree with it on a personal level and it does violate the separation of church and state but it doesn't really bother me. If I remember right those slogans were added to the pledge and currency when the nation was clinging to the Bible and fearing nuclear war with the Russians back in the 50's but I may be off in my memory of history class. It wasn't mentioned but the ritual of swearing on the bible in court bothers me much less these days as well.

 

I'm much more concerned with ID being passed off as science and people using their faith as an excuse to legislate their version of morality on those who believe differently through restricting birth control, discriminating against gay people, and passing things like sin taxes, dry counties, and not being able to buy beer before noon on Sundays and things of that nature.

 

I wish religious people could just be content in believing that all of us sinners are just going to burn in hell than for them to expect the government to pass laws (and sometimes succeed) that force their personal believe systems on my fellow heathens.

 

I hope that answers your question but if you have any other questions I'll be happy to try and elaborate.

[woods-racer]

Neo,

 

I'm happy to oblige, sir. I disagree with it on a personal level and it does violate the separation of church and state but it doesn't really bother me. If I remember right those slogans were added to the pledge and currency when the nation was clinging to the Bible and fearing nuclear war with the Russians back in the 50's but I may be off in my memory of history class. It wasn't mentioned but the ritual of swearing on the bible in court bothers me much less these days as well.

 

I'm much more concerned with ID being passed off as science and people using their faith as an excuse to legislate their version of morality on those who believe differently through restricting birth control, discriminating against gay people, and passing things like sin taxes, dry counties, and not being able to buy beer before noon on Sundays and things of that nature.

 

I wish religious people could just be content in believing that all of us sinners are just going to burn in hell than for them to expect the government to pass laws (and sometimes succeed) that force their personal believe systems on my fellow heathens.

 

I hope that answers your question but if you have any other questions I'll be happy to try and elaborate.

 

I was waiting for your response.

 

Thought you would be more upset at the God references.

 

But what I found to be the most upsetting to you, is also what I find to be the most hypocritical of the Christian faith.

 

Lets have a beer in a dry county on a Sunday morning and talk hockey.

[Drunkard]

I was waiting for your response.

 

Thought you would be more upset at the God references.

 

But what I found to be the most upsetting to you, is also what I find to be the most hypocritical of the Christian faith.

 

Lets have a beer in a dry county on a Sunday morning and talk hockey.

I used to be more militant in my stance against religion but over the years I've learned to pick my battles more. The references to God in the pledge and on money used to bother me but in the grand scheme of things they don't really matter until. Faith based legislation bothers me tremendously though so I choose to put my focus there.

 

The beer and hockey conversation sounds good too. Cheers to you, sir.

[Neo]

Mr. D ... Grateful!

 

We have common ground.

[MattPie]

Neo,

 

I'm happy to oblige, sir. I disagree with it on a personal level and it does violate the separation of church and state but it doesn't really bother me. If I remember right those slogans were added to the pledge and currency when the nation was clinging to the Bible and fearing nuclear war with the Russians back in the 50's but I may be off in my memory of history class. It wasn't mentioned but the ritual of swearing on the bible in court bothers me much less these days as well.

 

I'm much more concerned with ID being passed off as science and people using their faith as an excuse to legislate their version of morality on those who believe differently through restricting birth control, discriminating against gay people, and passing things like sin taxes, dry counties, and not being able to buy beer before noon on Sundays and things of that nature.

 

I wish religious people could just be content in believing that all of us sinners are just going to burn in hell than for them to expect the government to pass laws (and sometimes succeed) that force their personal believe systems on my fellow heathens.

 

I hope that answers your question but if you have any other questions I'll be happy to try and elaborate.

 

I'm not sure about the money, but God was added to the pledge in the 50s as you mention.

 

Fun fact: the pledge was written by Francis Bellamy, who was born in Mt. Morris, NY, which is adjacent to Letchworth SP.

Fun fact I just learned: Bellamy was a Christian Socialist minister, many of whom believe that capitalism is idolatrous and rooted in greed. I find it ironic that a minister didn't put "under God" in but Congress did.

[carpandean]

I'm not sure about the money, but God was added to the pledge in the 50s as you mention.

 

Coins: 1860's (with some interruptions on some coins after that)

Paper: 1950's

 

It's interesting that the Declaration of Independence features "their Creator" and "God", but the Constitution does not.  Even in the case of the DoI, no specific religion is described, though the use of the singular form of God precludes both atheism and any religion that believes in multiple gods.

Edited September 10, 2015 by carpandean

[MattPie]

Coins: 1860's (with some interruptions on some coins after that)

Paper: 1950's

 

It's interesting that the Declaration of Independence features "their Creator" and "God", but the Constitution does not.  Even in the case of the DoI, no specific religion is described, though the use of the singular form of God precludes both atheism and any religion that believes in multiple gods.

 

After a quick reading, it sounds like some of the references were added during the Continental Congress. I'm not too surprised that politicians would add those references.

[darksabre]

Coins: 1860's (with some interruptions on some coins after that)

Paper: 1950's

 

It's interesting that the Declaration of Independence features "their Creator" and "God", but the Constitution does not. Even in the case of the DoI, no specific religion is described, though the use of the singular form of God precludes both atheism and any religion that believes in multiple gods.

Bear in mind that the goal of the DoI was to rile up the citizens of the US to battle, many of whom were in the colonies to escape religious persecution. So while Jefferson wasn't much of a believer, he was a good politician.

[2ForTripping]

July 30 1956 Ike signed a law to insert "in god we trust " into the pledge. He also on the same day made a law regarding our national motto "in god we trust "

[carpandean]

July 30 1956 Ike signed a law to insert "in god we trust " into the pledge. He also on the same day made a law regarding our national motto "in god we trust "

 

But "in god we trust" was added to coins in 1864:

 

Edited September 11, 2015 by carpandean

[woods-racer]

Thanks Carpandean for adding your 2 cents  :P

[Drunkard]

But "in god we trust" was added to coins in 1864:

 

 

I guess that settles it then. Praise Jeebus!

[carpandean]

Thanks Carpandean for adding your 2 cents  :P

 

I could have given you my 3 cents:

 

Who knew we even had one of those?

 

 

I guess that settles it then. Praise Jeebus!

 

Technically, it doesn't settle which god.  Whatever one is there, we trust.

 

Another interesting fact found along the way: "Our Country; Our God" and "God, Our Trust" were the first suggestions by the Director of the Mint.

[Drunkard]

Technically, it doesn't settle which god.  Whatever one is there, we trust.

 

Another interesting fact found along the way: "Our Country; Our God" and "God, Our Trust" were the first suggestions by the Director of the Mint.

 

In that case, I'd like to submit Odin and Thor as official Gods of America.

 

 

He carries a hammer while the Christian God was nailed to a cross. That's a checkmate if I ever saw one.

[woods-racer]

I could have given you my 3 cents:

 

Who knew we even had one of those?

 

 

 

Technically, it doesn't settle which god.  Whatever one is there, we trust.

 

Another interesting fact found along the way: "Our Country; Our God" and "God, Our Trust" were the first suggestions by the Director of the Mint.

 

I had no clue on the 2 cents, let alone the 3 cents.

[Thwomp!]

In that case, I'd like to submit Odin and Thor as official Gods of America.

 

 

He carries a hammer while the Christian God was nailed to a cross. That's a checkmate if I ever saw one.

 

I chuckled.  You've been doing a great job representing us heathens in this thread! :thumbsup:

[Drunkard]

I chuckled. You've been doing a great job representing us heathens in this thread! :thumbsup:

It was a toss up between the flying spaghetti monster and Odin/Thor but I thought this jpeg was too funny to pass up. I'm glad somebody else got a kick out of it.

[darksabre]

So what do people think of the Pope? 

[LastPommerFan]

So what do people think of the Pope? 

 

When he speaks tomorrow, I hope to not listen for the things he says that I agree with, I hope to retain where his message is challenging me. 

[MattPie]

So what do people think of the Pope? 

 

He seems like a pretty cool guy, on the pope-cool scale. I tend to agree with more of his positions on the poor and whatnot than the previous guy. I know it's not getting much play outside Philly but people here are flipping out, both for the pope and in anger about the inconveniences that his visit is causing.

[Drunkard]

So what do people think of the Pope? 

 

The new Pope is awesome. He's not the judging type when it comes to homosexuality and even atheists can get into heaven. I still don't think it exists but it's a nice sentiment on his part, and hey, if I'm wrong I'll be telling St. Peter at the pearly gates that his man, Francis said I made the cut.

 

From an unbiased and simplistic standpoint the Pope is a religious figurehead and I completely understand most of his views, which I'll paraphrase as and arbitrarily number as:

 

1) Helping the poor is good

2) War is bad

3) Abortion is bad

4) Contraception is bad

5) Polluting the environment is bad

6) Women should not be priests

 

I personally agree with 1, 2, and 5 while I disagree vehemently on 4 and 6. On 3 I definitely see his point but I disagree because I'd prefer to keep the Roe v Wade ruling in place and wish that if things like contraception and the morning after pill were encouraged instead of discouraged then number 3 would be less and less prevalent in society in general which should help make number 4 seem helpful because it reduces 3 and abortion is worse than contraception.

 

To sum it all up, I agree with half his platform and I don't even follow his belief system. I think unbiased people can agree that Republicans tend to place much more emphasis on their faith when it comes to campaigning and making political decisions than Democrats do, but what I don't get is how they can claim to be followers of this guy (the Pope) or the guy he's supposed to be emulating (Jesus) and then ignore half of his platform like I do (particularly when it comes to claiming to want to be Christ like, while doing the opposite of what Christ would do). Seems completely hypocritical to me to act like Jesus should be emulated and then to ignore half his message.

[X. Benedict]

The new Pope is awesome. He's not the judging type when it comes to homosexuality and even atheists can get into heaven. I still don't think it exists but it's a nice sentiment on his part, and hey, if I'm wrong I'll be telling St. Peter at the pearly gates that his man, Francis said I made the cut.

 

From an unbiased and simplistic standpoint the Pope is a religious figurehead and I completely understand most of his views, which I'll paraphrase as and arbitrarily number as:

 

1) Helping the poor is good

2) War is bad

3) Abortion is bad

4) Contraception is bad

5) Polluting the environment is bad

6) Women should not be priests

 

I personally agree with 1, 2, and 5 while I disagree vehemently on 4 and 6. 

 

Just wondering, out of curiosity mostly,  if you don't believe in the paschal mystery, and the Eucharist, or the sacraments,  why would you vehemently disagree with 6. Why should women administer sacraments  you don't believe in anyway? 

[2ForTripping]

He probably disagrees with #6 based on gender equality.