PPRuNe Forums


Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 7th May 2017, 13:08   #61 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by ImageGear View Post
I laughed, did you post that from the back pews of the Nave this morning, the sermon must have been really boring?.


Imagegear
No such luck where I'm home and therefore could be cajoled into possibly attending under the right set of circumstances. I'm overseas at the moment posting from a country where I'm completely surrounded by hordes of godless commies so even finding an operating church if one were so inclined might pose a bit of a problem.

However, to their great credit and for which I am extremely grateful, not one of them has ever tried to impress upon me the ludicrous notion that soccer as a spectator sport is awesome, which is more than I can say about some countries I've been unlucky enough to find myself in during World Cup years where such lunacy runs deep and wide. In this, I stand in solidarity with these comrades who know as I do even ping pong and basketball are more fun to watch.
PukinDog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2017, 13:23   #62 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 622
ImageGear

Quote:
If one accepts the principle that there is "only one true God" then it is not difficult to understand that all believers are united by one God. This is not such a difficult concept if one also recognises that "man" is imperfect and often will not tolerate the imperfections of others.
I'm a believer 'one true God', at least the one that we should be concerned with, there may be others...

I feel just as connected (or not) to non believers as I do to believers. I don't think that my God judges one above the other, we are all equally 'guilty' and equally awesome in gods eyes.

I was happy when you said to Pukindog 'Glad to see that you're not taking this stuff too seriously...' I'm certain that God has a sense of humour.
Stan Woolley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2017, 13:59   #63 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Currently within the EU
Posts: 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gertrude the Wombat View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sallyann1234
I know believers in a number of different religions. Strangely enough none of them have ever said they believe in someone/something in the sky, whether fairy or otherwise.
To be honest, isn't the 'sky fairy' tag simply an attempt to offend?


Ah! - so you're accusing me of blasphemy for attempting to offend something that doesn't exist and wouldn't care if it did. I thought this would be a nice recursive topic.
As you rightly say the deity - if such existed - would not be bothered in the least.
But the believer may well be offended. You will surely realise that, but used the phrase anyway. As someone said above, it says something about the speaker.
Sallyann1234 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2017, 14:17   #64 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England
Posts: 3,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sallyann1234 View Post
But the believer may well be offended.
I'm afraid my view is that it's not reasonable to expect me to study all the world's religions in sufficient depth to be able to be certain that nothing I say could ever offend any adherent of any of them.


After all, they don't afford me that degree of respect - being told in a very concerned voice "I'll pray for you" is something I choose to find offensive, but it still happens.
Gertrude the Wombat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2017, 14:37   #65 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: YMML
Posts: 1,533
It says I find the idea of existence of a god on the same level as believing in sky fairies?
le Pingouin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2017, 15:34   #66 (permalink)
Tabs please !
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Biffins Bridge
Posts: 646
Quote:
I am personally in no doubt that there is a God

Mr Imagegear Sir,


It's an interesting debate. I see you use the term "God" in the singular. May I presume that you hold the view that the single god has many names be it Allah, God or whoever. If so then the view must also be held that religions such as Hinduism who have many gods must be wrong. It's an interesting paradox.


If we look at Christianity, it is actually a multi-deity religion if the definition of a deity is that people will pray or do deeds in the name of that individual. There's the father, the son, the holy ghost, the virgin Mary and an endless line of saints who specialise in different areas of human need. There's then the archangel and various tiers of lesser angels. I do wonder if that the single God is so omnipotent, why is there a need for a supporting cast of thousands ?
B Fraser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2017, 16:34   #67 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Currently within the EU
Posts: 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gertrude the Wombat View Post
I'm afraid my view is that it's not reasonable to expect me to study all the world's religions in sufficient depth to be able to be certain that nothing I say could ever offend any adherent of any of them.
Fortunately for you, such a study is not necessary. You know that using the sky fairy tag is a shotgun that will catch quite a few targets without you even having to aim.
Sallyann1234 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2017, 17:05   #68 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England
Posts: 3,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sallyann1234 View Post
Fortunately for you, such a study is not necessary. You know that using the sky fairy tag is a shotgun that will catch quite a few targets without you even having to aim.
But so would "gods" - it would offend those who think there's only one god, and it would offend those who think their god should be spelt "God". It's not clear how to win this one. "Deities" is even more offensive than "gods", because it is essentially the same thing but with the added hope that some people will be too stupid to work that out.
Gertrude the Wombat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2017, 17:26   #69 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 60
Posts: 1,945
Sally has you bang to rights GtW so probably best you stop digging.

You chose the term 'sky fairy' with one intention and one intention only and that was to offer offence.

There are countless other ways for you to have politely made your point but you deliberately chose the route of maximum offence and Sally has quite rightly called you out on it.
Seldomfitforpurpose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2017, 17:32   #70 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Next to Ross and Demelza
Age: 46
Posts: 827
It's an odd thing, but I find far more tolerance of other people's beliefs in an average church congregation than in a group of atheists. And the really odd thing is that people of faith are supposed to be the intolerant ones -according to atheists.

Gertrude, I'm sorry you find it offensive that somebody would pray for you. Have you not thought perhaps that it is their way of thinking of you, and perhaps you might just accept it as the gesture of kindness they feel it to be?
Martin the Martian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2017, 17:39   #71 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: YMML
Posts: 1,533
And the religious imposing their beliefs on others is not offensive? It's far more offensive than a mere name. Same-sex marriage anyone?
le Pingouin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2017, 17:43   #72 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 60
Posts: 1,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by le Pingouin View Post
And the religious imposing their beliefs on others is not offensive? It's far more offensive than a mere name. Same-sex marriage anyone?
Who imposed their beliefs on who?
Seldomfitforpurpose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2017, 18:23   #73 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England
Posts: 3,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seldomfitforpurpose View Post
You chose the term 'sky fairy' with one intention and one intention only and that was to offer offence.
It's the term most people seem to use on this forum - I might have used some other term elsewhere (in fact I almost certainly would have done, I'm not sure I've ever seen "sky fairy" used other than on Jet Blast). Do you not adjust how you say things to suit the local culture of your audience?
Gertrude the Wombat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2017, 18:25   #74 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England
Posts: 3,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin the Martian View Post
Gertrude, I'm sorry you find it offensive that somebody would pray for you. Have you not thought perhaps that it is their way of thinking of you, and perhaps you might just accept it as the gesture of kindness they feel it to be?
I am sorry that religious people find it offensive when I try to correct their thinking. Have you not thought perhaps that it is my way of thinking of them, and perhaps you might just accept it as the gesture of kindness I think it to be?
Gertrude the Wombat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2017, 18:29   #75 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 60
Posts: 1,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gertrude the Wombat View Post
It's the term most people seem to use on this forum - I might have used some other term elsewhere (in fact I almost certainly would have done, I'm not sure I've ever seen "sky fairy" used other than on Jet Blast). Do you not adjust how you say things to suit the local culture of your audience?
When making a point being offensive is a piece of cake, being polite not quite so it would seem.
Seldomfitforpurpose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2017, 18:31   #76 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England
Posts: 3,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seldomfitforpurpose View Post
When making a point being offensive is a piece of cake, being polite not quite so it would seem.
So what should I have said? As discussed, "gods" and "deities" are also offensive, and the only other term I've seen in regular use here - "imaginary friend" - doesn't seem much better than "sky fairy".
Gertrude the Wombat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2017, 18:38   #77 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Here
Posts: 223
That hole is getting deeper.
yellowtriumph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2017, 18:43   #78 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,976
Anyone with half a brain knows that there is only one true religion.



https://www.venganza.org/

Quote:
Even though we Pastafarians are skeptical of “science” and “logical conjecture based on evidence”, we respect the idea of science – its search for knowledge – and we admire the people who dedicate their lives to the cause.

How then is it not a contradiction for Pastafarians, a faith-based group, to support science, or at least support scientists?

We Believe an all-mighty Flying Spaghetti Monster alters the universe in a way that makes it *appear* that the scientific method is sound, that humanity’s knowledge and its advancement out of caves and into spaceships is a direct result of this process. It appears that we can deductively infer conclusions through experiment and reason.

We can’t fault Scientists who have not yet seen the Light – they are doing their jobs, and they are intellectually honest. The same can not be said for some groups, including many groups who have a Belief structure that stems from faith.

So why is Pastafarianism correct, when it sometimes contradicts reason? Because the FSM says so, and we Believe
Quote:
I’ve got mixed feelings about this since we Pastafarians are also skeptical about accepted causes of Climate Change. Years ago you’ll remember that we found a statistically significant relationship between the rise in average global temperature and the declining Pirate population.



I’ll note that even after 10 years, this data still has not been dis-proven by the science community, which we interpret as implicit acceptance of it’s Truth.
Hempy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2017, 18:49   #79 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Bedford, UK
Age: 64
Posts: 1,172
If I believed, truly believed, in an omniscient all powerful god, don't see why I would be bothered about what non-believers thought, unless of course I faced discrimination. Their statements condemn them don't they: not that it matters owing to the omniscience thing. Perhaps I would suggest you just turn the other cheek.
Mr Optimistic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2017, 18:52   #80 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Out to Grasse
Posts: 447
I am personally in no doubt that there is a God

Quote:
Mr Fraser, Sir
I am sure we could discuss in some depth, the various attributes and degrees of importance of "Deities" various, and the Trinity, however I made a statement of my personal position.

While I acknowledge that religions exist which deny direct access to a principle Deity except through an intermediary by means of intercession, this is not my chosen theology. I have no need of a cast of thousands.

My faith provides for direct, immediate and personal access to my God, and I have no doubt that there are other theologies and religions who will profess the same degree of access. Some may have more than one principle deity or indeed no principle deity, however I am not required by my God to directly question their beliefs, rather to demonstrate the richness and value of mine.

I subscribe to the old adage that "More is caught than taught".

The point is to differentiate between the individual and their beliefs. I have very close friendships with people from many faiths, I do not decry their choice of faith and neither do they mine, but our bonds of friendship transcend mere commercial or convenience relationships.

Quote:
Mr Loggerheads, Sir,
Quote:
unverified written word as evidence
It is my understanding that there is infinitely more documentary evidence to support the Christian Narrative then there is to support Greek Ancient History let alone Mythology. In this case I consider "verified written evidence" with a large spoon of suspicion. Far better to have a multitude of disparate sources telling stories that together, as a whole, represent a fair general overview of events.

Just think about how many witnesses to an aircraft incident would absolutely confirm that the engines were smoking, the wings came off first, there was an explosion, there was no explosion, etc, etc. I would expect to hear a range of impressions, some visual, video, photographs, statements, etc, that only when viewed in the round, could some semblance of the real situation be established.

Imagegear

Last edited by ImageGear; 7th May 2017 at 19:11.
ImageGear is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 21:17.


1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1