Richard Book is Innocent (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
oxfordtweed) wrote2010-07-22 04:39 am
oxfordtweed) wrote2010-07-22 04:39 am
Entry tags:
Pseudo Writer's Block
Found this here. Yep, I'm brining out my Bible icon again. It's oddly appropriate.
Do you condone people trying to push religion onto others, or shoving it down their throat? If so, why is it ok if you're emotionally and/or physically hurting the person you're doing it to? If not, why is it not ok that someone is trying to save someone else's soul?
Beliefs are a very personal thing; they define everything about who a person is. Unlike ideas, which a person can change within a fraction of a second, a belief by its very nature implies that something is all but engraved in stone.
I don't believe in a whole lot of anything, really. If really hard-pressed, I might give you a very solid idea which has been gouged into sandstone, but even that can be changed with a bit of persuasion and effort. But they are my ideas. While I don't believe that some all-powerful god created the universe in six days, I do agree with the theories expansion and a cosmic foam.
Both a belief and an idea fall into the category of defining a person, but there's a very small difference, and let's take Russell's Teapot (a totally safe non-diety) to illustrate it. I'm pretty almost certainly positive that there's no teapot orbiting the sun between Earth and Mars. Certain to the point that I'll even say that, "No. There's no teapot." But, if Phil Plait posted to his blog tomorrow a NASA photograph with a teapot visible, I would change my mind, no questions, and gladly admit that I was wrong.
Believing that there's no teapot would, in theory, be a bit more tricky. If that photo showed up on Bad Astronomy tomorrow, and you 100% BELIEVED that there is no teapot, you might be quick to point out that it could be any amount of space junk that looks like a teapot, or maybe insist that the photo had been doctored.
See what I'm getting at?
So, with the long exposition out of the way, no. It is not okay to shove a belief onto someone. If someone really believes in something, no amount of evidence will convince them otherwise. But if someone has ideas about the universe, then they'd (in theory) be more open to hearing other ideas. I always feel like I should lose points on my atheist licence for this, but two of my favourite Residents albums are God in 3 Persons and the live Wormwood recording. The first one isn't too terribly religious -- at least, not on the surface. It's about a crooked faith healer; an idea which I find delightful in its irony. The second one, Wormwood, is subtitled Curious Stories from the Bible. And it's exactly what it says on the tin: performance art pieces about biblical stories. Of course, being the Residents, it's a collection of the bloodiest, most fucked-up stories the old testament has to offer, and is as a result very powerful. I'm pretty sure they don't buy into religion, but I don't really know, since I have no idea who the people behind the masks are.
But, that's sort of my point. They released this album, knowing it wouldn't appeal to atheists or Christians. It's targeted at a group somewhere in between -- people who can listen to stories about barbecuing children without being offended or feeling like they're having the bible being crammed down their throats. If a person doesn't want to listen to you wax evangelical, then no amount of preaching will change their mind. You're just wasting your time and theirs, and neither of you will be happy.
If you really must preach to somebody, find a person who's on the fence. They're the ones who really want to listen.
Do you condone people trying to push religion onto others, or shoving it down their throat? If so, why is it ok if you're emotionally and/or physically hurting the person you're doing it to? If not, why is it not ok that someone is trying to save someone else's soul?
Beliefs are a very personal thing; they define everything about who a person is. Unlike ideas, which a person can change within a fraction of a second, a belief by its very nature implies that something is all but engraved in stone.
I don't believe in a whole lot of anything, really. If really hard-pressed, I might give you a very solid idea which has been gouged into sandstone, but even that can be changed with a bit of persuasion and effort. But they are my ideas. While I don't believe that some all-powerful god created the universe in six days, I do agree with the theories expansion and a cosmic foam.
Both a belief and an idea fall into the category of defining a person, but there's a very small difference, and let's take Russell's Teapot (a totally safe non-diety) to illustrate it. I'm pretty almost certainly positive that there's no teapot orbiting the sun between Earth and Mars. Certain to the point that I'll even say that, "No. There's no teapot." But, if Phil Plait posted to his blog tomorrow a NASA photograph with a teapot visible, I would change my mind, no questions, and gladly admit that I was wrong.
Believing that there's no teapot would, in theory, be a bit more tricky. If that photo showed up on Bad Astronomy tomorrow, and you 100% BELIEVED that there is no teapot, you might be quick to point out that it could be any amount of space junk that looks like a teapot, or maybe insist that the photo had been doctored.
See what I'm getting at?
So, with the long exposition out of the way, no. It is not okay to shove a belief onto someone. If someone really believes in something, no amount of evidence will convince them otherwise. But if someone has ideas about the universe, then they'd (in theory) be more open to hearing other ideas. I always feel like I should lose points on my atheist licence for this, but two of my favourite Residents albums are God in 3 Persons and the live Wormwood recording. The first one isn't too terribly religious -- at least, not on the surface. It's about a crooked faith healer; an idea which I find delightful in its irony. The second one, Wormwood, is subtitled Curious Stories from the Bible. And it's exactly what it says on the tin: performance art pieces about biblical stories. Of course, being the Residents, it's a collection of the bloodiest, most fucked-up stories the old testament has to offer, and is as a result very powerful. I'm pretty sure they don't buy into religion, but I don't really know, since I have no idea who the people behind the masks are.
But, that's sort of my point. They released this album, knowing it wouldn't appeal to atheists or Christians. It's targeted at a group somewhere in between -- people who can listen to stories about barbecuing children without being offended or feeling like they're having the bible being crammed down their throats. If a person doesn't want to listen to you wax evangelical, then no amount of preaching will change their mind. You're just wasting your time and theirs, and neither of you will be happy.
If you really must preach to somebody, find a person who's on the fence. They're the ones who really want to listen.
no subject
d
My religious beliefs are all kins of complicated and I actually hardly ever even talk about them except to people I'm very close with and even then it's not a "you must believe this" thing. I'm actually really wary of people who feel the need to evangelise. I grew up in a whackjob church that was really hot on the evangelizing thing and was also really controlling and judgmental and damaging
no subject
Also, I wanted to point out to Mr. X that you make a very good point =D This was probably one of the most thought out answers on the board.
no subject
no subject
If they're on the fence, they'll let me know.