"Rule of 25" and Religious Emblems

[TheScout 10]

ASM,

 

But who are you to say that the memebers of a particular Christian denomination are "twisting" doctrine. Maybe they are right? What about those who believe their denomination is the only correct path. If we are to respect all beleifs, shouldn't we respect that beleif as well.

 

All religions can not be created equal. Some must be right some must be wrong. Many make contradicting statements and claim to be the true faith.

 

Christianity and Islam for example. Both claim to be the only true way, but they contradict on many issues. So not everyone can be right! There are wrong religions.

 

That said I do not think that much of myself to claim to know for sure what is the right way. I have my beleif and hope it is right, and will see when the time comes.

 

Same thing for Christian denominations. Though I too would like to see them go away, it is a naive beleif. They claim opposite things in some aspects. Both can not be right.

 

I do own a copy of the Gospel of the Redmen. Must admit I have never done more than just browsed through it.

 

It seems our society seems to glorify the Indian ways, especially in the last several decades. I am from Upstate New York. The Iroqouis were the dominate tribe around here. People are taught myths like the Iroqous Confederacy was a model for the US Constitution, which it was surely not.

 

Meanwhile people are not taught the less savory aspects of their society. The Iroqouis practiced cannibalism. The scope of their warfare was brutal as they would raid white settlements and kill with no regard to age, sex, or condition. The Westernmost tribe of the Iroqouis League, the Seneca currently live in the area where I do. However they did not always. They actually did not live there until the 1700s. At that time they destroyed another tribe, called the Neutrals so they could exploit more land for beaver pelts. They weren't even kind enough to give the Neutrals a reservation.

 

I think on the scorecard of history Western Civilization has brought us much more than any other.

 

 

As for the western ways, a lot of advances, yes, but also a lot of destruction. Assimulation is not the way. Look at STAR TREK and The BORG. Find and sit with some brothers, possibly talk with some of the Elders about how it was precontact. You might be surprised Two books to read, Seton's "GOSPEL OF THE REDMAN". You can order it through your Councils store, and 1422. Civilizations rise, on occasion destroy the previous one (records and all), future civilizations have no idea what really happen, and thaen think they made things better for everyone, when sometimes they didn't.

[GernBlansten 10]

TheScout, remember, all religions are wrong. Except mine of course.

[TheScout 10]

Gern,

 

Well yeah, unless you believe other religons are right.

 

 

Also just a note. I quoted ASM's reference about Star Trek etc. in my last post and forgot to remark on it. Just can't figure out for the life of me how to edit a post.

[LongHaul 10]

Scout,

Editing a post 101; Looking at a post you should find; top to bottom the name of the thread, beneath that should be the Day, Date and Time posted. Reading accross that line the next thing should be a two boxes one with a ? and one with PM. Next to those should be a picture of a paper clip the next thing in that line will be a picture of a sheet of paper and a pencil. This is your target. Clicking on that will allow you to edit your post, IF you are the one that posted it and if you can get back before someone else posts to that thread. This icon also disappears after 30 minutes or an hour I'm not sure which.

LongHaul

 

Dan, did you get my PM?

[TheScout 10]

Thanks

[packsaddle 753]

LongHaul, I have tested this empirically on many occasions and that time limit is closer to an hour, I think that is how long we have to edit.

The Scout "And I think it does affect our whole organization. If we allow the Flying Spaghetti Monster Emblem, the BSA becomes a joke. I do not think any of us want that." That is, indeed, your 'opinion'. Now I'd be interested in an explanation of why you think it would make BSA a joke.

Dan, "I am particularly struck by the USNews article that GernBlasten posted a link to in the atheist thread about the ignorance about the Bible of many Americans who profess Christianity. I find it very sad to think that I've studied their holy book more than they have. Personally, I think comparative religion study from a historical perspective should be manditory study in all religious ed classes. After all, how can you know that something is not for you if you don't know what it is?"

Just a comment: Freud said that ignorance is a poor basis for belief. My observations (not contradicted, by the way, in these threads;)) have been that ignorance seems to provide fine support for a wide variety of beliefs. Indeed, it seems that those with the greatest ignorance are the most confident of their convictions. And BTW, I've always liked the following quote:

"It has often and confidently been asserted, that man's origin can never be known: but ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man (1871)

But a recent study by Dunning is a real gem, "Among the Inept, Researchers Discover, Ignorance Is Bliss":

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9E03EFD61E3AF93BA25752C0A9669C8B63

But we all knew this already, h'mmmmm? (This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[TheScout 10]

The Flying Spaghetti Emblem would be a joke because we all know it is not a religion. It is common sense. It does not deseve to rank with emblems of actual religions.

 

It seems a shame that anyone with strong convictions is considered ignorant. There are many people with quite extreme convictions that are very well learned, and make a choose to believe how they do.

[Trevorum 24]

Thanks for that link, pack. It explains much. However, I'm not sure I fully understand all the implications ...

[packsaddle 753]

The Scout,

Just because you think you know something - doesn't mean EVERYONE knows it the way you think they do. If someone sincerely worships in a particular way (to a god or to a rock or a spaghetti monster), you (as someone not sharing that faith) are not competent to know it is not a religion nor that it is in any other way inferior to your equally unsubstantiated beliefs. You are free to exercise whatever prejudice you like but if so, you should be honest enough to admit it.

 

If you view someone's faith as "a joke" then that may be nothing more than your baseless opinion, or worse, it may be based on prejudice...unless you can provide a cogent explanation for that view so the rest of us can see the "joke" in understandable terms.

 

In my post regarding confidence, faith, and ignorance, I did not say "that anyone with strong convictions is considered ignorant". You chose to interpret it in that manner. Rather, I posited that ignorance can often lead to or accompany great confidence or strong convictions. I think you are smart enough to know the difference. Do you?

But you chose to interpret it in a manner that assumed that I stated something that I didn't. I gave you a chance NOT to respond in this manner, but you did anyway. Why?

 

Trevorum, I read this study a while back and felt less equivocal about my assessment of any number of administrators. ...Also the current administration, and for that matter, several others in the past. It isn't necessarily cause for optimism.

Edited part: Oops, typo(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[TheScout 10]

C'mon packsaddle! You seem to be a reasonable person. The Flying Spaghetti Monster is absurd. Some things are just self-evident.

 

Maybe I got the wrong implication from your last post. However, you didn't seem to take into account that people can have great confidence that their faith is wrong and not be ignorant at all.

 

[Trevorum 24]

Not to belabor the obvious, but I believe the whole point of the Flying Spaghetti Monster movement is that some religious beliefs ARE absurd.

 

Perhaps some things that should be "self-evident" are not because different people accept different standards of evidence.

[DanKroh 11]

So, TheScout, is the Flying Spaghetti Monster more or less absurd than:

 

golden plates containing revelations that can only be translated with "magic glasses"?

that people are really beings of pure spirit that can travel outside their bodies whenever they want and have existed for trillions of years?

that God lives near a star called Kolob?

that Xenu, an alien ruler, brought billions of people to Earth 75 million years ago in DC-10s?

a deity who has somewhere between 4 and sixteen arms and the head of an elephant, and who rides a giant mouse?

 

One man's absurdity is another man's devout religious belief. Be careful how you judge both.

[TheScout 10]

I respect beliefs that have been around longer than those which are recently made up.

 

I can not state it any better than this, so I won't try to,

 

"Tradition draws on the wisdom of many generations and the tests of time, while "reason" may be a mask for the preferences of one man, and at best represents only the untested wisdom of one generation. Any existing value or institution has undergone the correcting influence of past experience and ought to be respected."

 

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism

 

 

[DanKroh 11]

Ah, yes, Edmund Burke. Fascinating fellow.

 

I prefer the quote apocryphally attributed to him:

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing"

 

Ironic, isn't it, that conservatism saw its rise to prominence during the Age of Reason.

 

So how old does something have to be to earn your respect? The 1950s? The 1830s? The 1650s?

[ASM915 90]

Scout,

DA here again.

Being a Christian Absolutist, There is right and there is wrong, no middle ground, can you elaborate more on your comment "I respect beliefs that have been around longer than....". If the belief is Pagan in nature, and has been around since Pre-Christian times (a very long time),does this mean you respect that belief? How does this hold with the Right and Wrong philosophy of a Christian Absolutist?

Sorry, had to ask since you opened the door.