Charismatic Chaos

Where did we conclude that everything under the Sun had to be supported by evidence? Is there no room for cultural mythos, allegory, and parable?

I've said here before that if I was confronted by a god, or heard what I though was God's voice, I would go to the doctor asap and get checked out.Pshycologically ill people experience 'realities' all the time, some go for help, others become Christians.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with mythos, allegory and parable. On the contrary, I think they are a large part of what makes being a human so interesting, and being an aspiring writer myself, I find them invaluable as a tool. However, I don't believe them. I love the stories of Paul Bunyan and Calamity Jane and Pecos Bill, etc. They're part of American mythos and are very fun to read, but I don't think there really was giant with a large blue ox who chopped down trees in my neck of the woods.I love going to the movies and getting lost in the worlds of Tolkien, ROddenberry, or Spielberg, but again, I don't leave the theater thinking they're true. That's the difference. In religion, people left the show believing the allegory rather than just appreciating it for what it is.

Some of us believe that life itself is the show and that we have an opportunity to meet the Director!

Way to completely dismiss the point of an analogy.Is it good or bad to accept allegory and myth as objective fact without evidence, Phat? Do you believe that Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade is an historical account of the finding of the Holy Grail? Why, or why not?

It depends. For one thing, I occasionally accept a perceived experience as valid even if I don't have evidence.I realize that Indiana Jones was made a book and a movie so I know it is meant to be a fable. Much of organized religion is the same way.

Hi Phatboy ...
Hope all is well. Oh ye, of lil' faith. How dare you take the name of Mr. Jones in vain ...You should be ashamed. One Love

Just to say Phat, I doubt you'll get the response you want in all of this ...

Thank you for the exchange.
Hope things are well ...Phatboy - please acknowledge that I was just clownin' with ya in Message 97 (peek there for 'lol' and note - I realize it wasn't that funny ... if at all!). I tend to agree with a perspective in this light. Every society has a verbal cultural heritage - or an ‘inventory of lore’, if you will, which has been handed down from one generation to another. Considering animistic substance is not typically codified into written documents, but transmitted inter-generationally through verbal means, the study of a specific culture's verbal heritage may lend a great deal of understanding towards their specific beliefs and such.Also, while we know most all religious people employ certain sacred narratives, which we refer to as myths, not everybody regards that these narratives often, at least in part, promote an explanation concerning how things have become the way they are, and so, such myths indeed relate intimately to a culture's worldview explaining, integrating, validating, and sanctioning its belief system. Now, as proverbs and legends describe wisdom and phenomenal exploits ‘in ordinary, profane time’, these myths often portray the work of spiritual power[s] by arranging the existing order ‘in primordial, sacred time’.Additionally, one may come to understand that while creation myths, such as that of the Haudenosaunee for instance, often depict the origin and destiny of the world - of humankind itself, one will also find National myths, such as that of the tribes of Yuhdea, which tend to describe how various tribes and nations came into being, as well as their corresponding depictions of humankinds' origins and destinies. It seems that the historicity of myths need not be accepted; nevertheless, myths presently being told in animistic contexts reveal specific cultural motifs currently held by those with tribal origins.As a matter of fact, within many cases, even when the historical content of a myth changes, the cultural motifs communicated therein remain the same.For example, by studying the mythological content of modern comic books, Mircea Eliade suggests that anthropologists have learned quite a bit regarding certain American conceptions of bravery and heroism and their perceptions concerning victories of good over evil, and vice versa. Such seems the case when comparing the dichotomy of spiritual forces of good and evil, as well as those presented within the causal benefits of moral benevolence and accountability, found within the legends of Hebraic and Haudenosaunee tribes ...Although the plots change, many of the cultural motifs remain the same.One LoveEdited by Bailey, : sp.

quote:

---

Although the plots change, many of the cultural motifs remain the same.

---

None of the other animals can do this!Lets change direction for a moment, though. I have shown all of you many video clips of the really bad charismatics...the P.T. Barnum hucksters and the fanatically insane! Lets critique some of the "better" evangelical Pastors for a moment. Here are some of the better ones of the bunch: How Can I Be Right With God? Part A Alistair Begg is one of the saner charismatics.(if he even considers himself charismatic I do not know ) Charles StanleyWicked World, Angry God John MacArthur is respected in fundie circles as being one of the better Bible teachers.Edited by Phat, : fixed

Thanks for the exchange Phat.
Hope things are well ... lol - it does seem like a unique trait. Although, I bet certain analogies could be made by showing how various species adapt striking similarities, even while thriving in separate regions. Sure, some aspects will differ, but a bee will remain a bee, whether here or there. However, that brings up an interesting point in regards to indigenous peoples. As I said in Message 68, the majority of the worlds religions are comprised of indigenous people who share in common a certain awareness towards a higher power than themselves.Very seldom does one find an indigenous people without such an awareness and while it is true that children are highly susceptible to indoctrination, as that is what even a secular education is, it is also fairly common to find children who may not naturally identify that a presence greater than themselves is nonexistent, although such beliefs rarely seem to flourish naturally, which may expose what such faith can produce, as children are most often constantly inundated with a secular or fixed-marriage religious world belief system.In the end tho, an ontological naturalistic world view may remain as a minority belief system, perhaps bordering on unnatural, apart from indoctrination ...At least as unnatural and seemingly abnormal as Imperial christianity.It may be sort of interesting to think about. Alistair Begg ... is he that ol' Irish fella ?If so, I enjoy much of his commentary ...What lil' I've heard anyway.One Love

Scottish, I believe

Thanks for the exchange Phats ...
Hope things are well with you. Ah - you are right. I took a sec to check that link you provided and he is indeed a Scotsman. I had never seen what he looked like before ...He looks much younger than I envisioned, seeing as I've only heard a few of his radio broadcasts and I had pictured this lil' irish fella all along.
Honestly, he seems quite down to earth and ordinary. Until I snuck that peek of him, he always reminded me of the granpappy I never had ...Also, I don't recall hearin' him pass the plate in the few snippets I heard from him - lolOne LoveEdited by Bailey, : sp.

---

I'm not here to mock or condemn what you believe, tho my intentions are no less than to tickle your thinker.
If those in first century CE had known what these words mean ... 'I want and desire mercy, not sacrifice'
They surely would not have murdered the innocent; why trust what I say, when you can learn for yourself?
Think for yourself.Mercy Trumps Judgement,
Love Weary

Hi Bailey, I did. And now I'm back home having boarded and flown again.Truck still in the shop? Well, having prior knowledge of the outcome, I question why the laws exist in the first place and were given to the tribes by God?It seems like it would have been easier to let people figure out what's right and wrong on their own, since the laws only benefit "cheifs" and oppresses the "injuns." It seems like, IM-very-HO, God gave the laws with "a certain foresight regarding the preparation of care, direction and guardianship of a communities vested interest within that specific culture", if in fact one believes God presented Moses with the laws.Which is why I question why there is a need for the laws. IF God knows the outcome, that the laws would be abused and manipulated, and in turn used to oppress, there would be no need for the laws in the first place. The only beneficiaries are the powerful and wealthy. That is why I believe the laws are man made, for the purpose of control and opppression. Interesting. You seem to hold more of a Buddist-type belief in the afterlife, where there really is no afterlife because there is no actual death. Where the temporal self is just one aspect of our existance. I agree with what you wrote. You'd be surprised. I'm an atheist, as in I reject theistic positions on the belief in God. However, we seem to agree on what life, death and what existance means. I'm sure with some differences. And I would agree with you 100% when we speak of man made laws, however when speaking about God given laws, this seems a bit apologetic. God has the foresight. He should know the outcome of giving these laws before hand. If there is a God I think He would have better judgement than that.Man made these laws and ascribed them to God. Man used these laws to control and oppress and that makes God look like a tyrannical fool. Man, in my opinion, has ruined the concept of God by using God as a scapegoat for their own personal gain...IM-very-HO. It seems like we have gone a little off topic, but I too enjoy the exchange.Thanks. Yours are as well.- Oni

---

If it's true that our species is alone in the universe, then I'd have to say that the universe aimed rather low and settled for very little.
~George Carlin

If you neglect the instances of clear philanthropy in the name of religion, then you are not being honest or fair in your evaluation. We all know that people have done some amazingly heinous things in the name of religion, but there have been some amazingly heinous things done in the name of science too. Should we ban science because some scientist's moral compass was broken?Advocating the banning of a religion is not a solution. In fact, that's just as fanatical as the religious fanatics wanting to ban atheism. Think of what justifications have come to pass in light of similar sentiments. The Holocaust comes to mind. In fact, Stalin, in the name of atheism, slaughtered millions more than Hitler did! Should we therefore ban atheism?The punishment doesn't fit the crime, especially when a religion usually and expressly prohibits the very action the people end up doing! You can't uniformly blame "religion" for the world's ills just because people used it as a crutch or as propaganda. You could make that argument about anything in this world.This is the problem with people like Harris and Dawkins and possibly you. They are so busy pointing fingers and patting each other the back that they can't realize their own hypocrisy. While they condemn fundamentalism, they're so consumed by it they can't realize that they're every bit as fundamental as the one's they excoriate. Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.

---

"Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson