The Paracast, Guests and Religion.

[Angel of Ioren]

Wow, I'm surprised you don't know Michael Shermer - just so you know, he's unliked by some people in this forum for his skepticism. I'm a fan of his though.

 

[tyder001]

Hmmm, I resemble that remark. Seriously, I don't dislike him for his skepticism. I dislike him for his dishonesty that Don has given an example or two of. Once somebody chooses a team "Skeptic vs believer" then all honest objectivity goes out the window. Still, he does make some good points and I wouldn't dismiss his points out of hand. By the way, wasn't he studying at one time to be a theologian or something? Or have I got the wrong guy? Anyway, I can well understand how someone can get disenchanted with their faith. But, some people just seem to have to be on a "team" be it religious or secular. He appears to (imo) be one of those folks. But, again if it touches you are resonates with you then have at it. I'm trying to turn over a new leaf and not simply "attack" everytime I disagree with somebody. Not that I've ever been overly combative but lately I've been (imo) a little to quick to post without thinking or reading the whole thread. So, here's to Michael S. I'm not gonna listen to him, but he's certainly got "his-story" and I have mine.

 

[Angel of Ioren]

Shermer was a born-again Christian at one point.

 

[tyder001]

I thought so. He looks (no, it's not the same guy.) But, he looks like a guy I went to school with. This fellow was a Pentecostal and a good guy. His name was actually Mike, but no Schermer and also he was from North Alabama. Still, the first time I ever saw Michael S. I thought of my long ago classmate. Then when I read he had been a Christian I had to re-check to make sure it wasn't the same guy.

 

[jpw.in.wi]

From the BBC: At the age of 14, he joined the Hitler Youth.... World War II saw his studies at Traunstein seminary interrupted when he was drafted into an anti-aircraft unit in Munich...

Okay, then that same article reminds us that membership in the Hitler Youth was REQUIRED by German law. "Conscripted" would have been a more accurate word for the author of this article to use than "joined".

You also chose not to include, again from the same article, that he DESERTED the army and was briefly held as a POW once the war was over.

When my wife's grandfather was a boy, membership in the HY was not mandatory. But he was drafted into the Wehrmacht, just like young Ratzinger was. He and his family were never Nazis, but he spent years fighting first against the Russians in the East before being sent west to help reinforce defenses against the American invasion. He struggled through horrific combat and miserable living conditions to stay alive and to help keep his friends alive through circumstances that I can't even imagine, all the while having no idea of where his wife was or even if she was still alive. He was shot in the back and also held as a POW. Eventually he was reunited with his wife and they rebuilt their life together after the war. Does this make him bad, or evil, too?

Muslims took offence when, in 2006, he quoted a 14th Century Byzantine emperor who said the Prophet Muhammad had brought the world only "evil and inhuman" things....

Did you ever bother to read the lecture he gave that provides the context for that quote before using it against him? Do you even know what the topic of the lecture was, or what the "'evil and inhuman' things" were that that emperor was referring to? I'd recommend that you do.

It was a scholarly lecture about the relationship between faith and reason, and because of the way the media played just a few words--the way they only heard what they WANTED to hear, because it would be titillating and attract readers' attention--people were murdered. Is there any outrage here over that?

Then Jews were taken aback when a breakaway group of bishops was welcomed back into the Church fold, including one who was found to be a Holocaust-denier.

I'm not sure exactly who the "Jews" are that the author is supposedly citing here. But who cares, right? And of course no one is going to bother to do any homework on this point either.

The funny thing is, this article you linked to really isn't any sort of anti-Benedict hit-piece. But it's about as superficial as you can get. Just because its author mentions something, it would be dangerous to take it at face value. That "breakaway group of bishops" isn't even named, for crying out loud!

Anyway, they have NEVER denied that the popes since Vatican II are legitimate, as the sedevacantists do. JPII excommunicated them because the founder of the society ordained more men as bishops for the society than JPII had authorized. They never walked away from the Church. They are not a "breakaway group".

That was a long time ago, and as a gesture of goodwill, Benedict lifted those excommunications and invited them to dialogue about their objections to certain doctrinal errors coming in the wake of Vatican II that they feel have been poisoning the Church. It was only AFTER that that one of the bishops of the order made a comment during an interview that minimized the scale of the Holocaust. The superior of the society apologized to "all people of good will" and CENSURED the bishop. He is forbidden from issuing any public opinion on any political or historical matter, and he has basically dropped out of view ever since.

From: miskeptics.org: Victims of clerical sex abuse have reacted furiously to Pope Benedict’s claim yesterday that paedophilia wasn’t considered an “absolute evil” as recently as the 1970s. In his traditional Christmas address yesterday to cardinals and officials working in Rome, Pope Benedict XVI also claimed that child pornography was increasingly considered “normal” by society.

“In the 1970s, pedophilia was theorized as something fully in conformity with man and even with children,” the Pope said.

“It was maintained — even within the realm of Catholic theology — that there is no such thing as evil in itself or good in itself. There is only a ‘better than’ and a ‘worse than’. Nothing is good or bad in itself.”

He sure sounds twisted to me, and if you don't think he is evil-looking, you need to check with an eye doctor...

I'm not sure why you're quoting this stuff. If you read the article, it's pretty clear that Benedict is saying that things have gone horribly wrong in the West following the cultural revolution of the 1960s and 70s. And the sicknesses have afflicted many "Catholic" theologians. Just about anybody can become a "Catholic Theologian". They are a dime a dozen, and you can find one that will find justification for just about any weird and twisted thing you can imagine. But many of them have been sitting on faculty at so-called Catholic universities for decades, constantly hammering against everything that the Church has stood for and driving young people away from their faith.

And perhaps the favorite past time of those theologians is attacking the Pope and continuing the effort to destroy and then redefine the meanings and natures of human sexuality, gender, marriage, and the family. And by golly, they've been pretty successful!

They were wild seeds sown 50 years ago, and who can deny that we're now reaping a whirlwind of negative consequences?

Anyway, Chris, you wrote that if I can't see the "evil" on the inside and the outside of the Pope, then maybe I need my eyes checked. You've shown plenty of selective vision here. I love the Paracast and admire all of the work you do, as well as the way you handle topics on the program. It's very disappointing to see just how mean-spirited and bigoted you and others here become when someone like me says something like, "You know, maybe we shouldn't be attacking people for the way they look ... you know, like the Pope?"

But what do I know?

 

[Angel of Ioren]

FYI - I moved a post by goggsmackay since I thought it could stand on its own - check it out here: https://www.theparacast.com/forum/threads/bill-nye-and-ufo-discussions.9692/#post-123205

 

[Goggs Mackay]

Okay, then that same article reminds us that membership in the Hitler Youth was REQUIRED by German law. "Conscripted" would have been a more accurate word for the author of this article to use than "joined".

You also chose not to include, again from the same article, that he DESERTED the army and was briefly held as a POW once the war was over.

When my wife's grandfather was a boy, membership in the HY was not mandatory. But he was drafted into the Wehrmacht, just like young Ratzinger was. He and his family were never Nazis, but he spent years fighting first against the Russians in the East before being sent west to help reinforce defenses against the American invasion. He struggled through horrific combat and miserable living conditions to stay alive and to help keep his friends alive through circumstances that I can't even imagine, all the while having no idea of where his wife was or even if she was still alive. He was shot in the back and also held as a POW. Eventually he was reunited with his wife and they rebuilt their life together after the war. Does this make him bad, or evil, too?




Did you ever bother to read the lecture he gave that provides the context for that quote before using it against him? Do you even know what the topic of the lecture was, or what the "'evil and inhuman' things" were that that emperor was referring to? I'd recommend that you do.

It was a scholarly lecture about the relationship between faith and reason, and because of the way the media played just a few words--the way they only heard what they WANTED to hear, because it would be titillating and attract readers' attention--people were murdered. Is there any outrage here over that?




I'm not sure exactly who the "Jews" are that the author is supposedly citing here. But who cares, right? And of course no one is going to bother to do any homework on this point either.

The funny thing is, this article you linked to really isn't any sort of anti-Benedict hit-piece. But it's about as superficial as you can get. Just because its author mentions something, it would be dangerous to take it at face value. That "breakaway group of bishops" isn't even named, for crying out loud!

Anyway, they have NEVER denied that the popes since Vatican II are legitimate, as the sedevacantists do. JPII excommunicated them because the founder of the society ordained more men as bishops for the society than JPII had authorized. They never walked away from the Church. They are not a "breakaway group".

That was a long time ago, and as a gesture of goodwill, Benedict lifted those excommunications and invited them to dialogue about their objections to certain doctrinal errors coming in the wake of Vatican II that they feel have been poisoning the Church. It was only AFTER that that one of the bishops of the order made a comment during an interview that minimized the scale of the Holocaust. The superior of the society apologized to "all people of good will" and CENSURED the bishop. He is forbidden from issuing any public opinion on any political or historical matter, and he has basically dropped out of view ever since.




I'm not sure why you're quoting this stuff. If you read the article, it's pretty clear that Benedict is saying that things have gone horribly wrong in the West following the cultural revolution of the 1960s and 70s. And the sicknesses have afflicted many "Catholic" theologians. Just about anybody can become a "Catholic Theologian". They are a dime a dozen, and you can find one that will find justification for just about any weird and twisted thing you can imagine. But many of them have been sitting on faculty at so-called Catholic universities for decades, constantly hammering against everything that the Church has stood for and driving young people away from their faith.

And perhaps the favorite past time of those theologians is attacking the Pope and continuing the effort to destroy and then redefine the meanings and natures of human sexuality, gender, marriage, and the family. And by golly, they've been pretty successful!

They were wild seeds sown 50 years ago, and who can deny that we're now reaping a whirlwind of negative consequences?

Anyway, Chris, you wrote that if I can't see the "evil" on the inside and the outside of the Pope, then maybe I need my eyes checked. You've shown plenty of selective vision here. I love the Paracast and admire all of the work you do, as well as the way you handle topics on the program. It's very disappointing to see just how mean-spirited and bigoted you and others here become when someone like me says something like, "You know, maybe we shouldn't be attacking people for the way they look ... you know, like the Pope?"

All of us need reminding sometimes not to take speech out of context. That is for sure. Regarding how pope Benedict looks however I don't think anyone is seriously equating 'looking evil' in a blatantly comic way with evil deeds or intentions. I cannot speak for Chris but as far as those photos go, I think they do look 'evil' but no more so than many photos taken of me when the old 'red eye' thing happens!
I would bet that pope Benedict himself would see the funny side about those photos - they are pure gothic horror! In fact, I think they are so 'evil' in a cartoon way that I even previously posted that I wasn't sure that they had not been touched up a little with photoshop!
I think we need to seperate real issues with the church from this particular little episode that I think a few people have taken a little seriously! I do not know the pope obviously and imagine that he is probably a perfectly nice gentleman in the flesh. So are many people who have the misfortune of looking a certain way!
Are you familiar with an actor/writer called Marty Feldman? He was born with a serious squint and 'sticky-out' eyes you would not believe - he became a somewhat succesful actor and writer, having the respect of many of his peers. He was well aware that he had very unique looks and he decided there would be no point trying to hide himself away from everyones' stares and he chose the opposite route, in that he became a performer, seen by millions. He would use his looks to great and comic effect and I doubt he thought there was any big deal or anything wrong with people thinking he 'looked funny' because it was a fact. He did look funny. Really funny!
In the same way, pope Benedict looks nowhere near as gentle as pope John Paul II and I am sure he is well aware of it. I imagine he has thought about his own looks from time to time and I imagine the thought of someone saying he looked 'pure evil' would amuse him, especially considering his chosen profession! It is soooo opposite a thing, to what a pope should aspire to that I contend it can only be seen as comical to say a pope looked 'pure evil'!
gordon

 

[Ezechiel]

And perhaps the favorite past time of those theologians is attacking the Pope and continuing the effort to destroy and then redefine the meanings and natures of human sexuality, gender, marriage, and the family. And by golly, they've been pretty successful!

They were wild seeds sown 50 years ago, and who can deny that we're now reaping a whirlwind of negative consequences?

That's kind of relative isn't it. If the definition absolutely belongs to something like the catholic church then the consequences to that sect and its teaching are obviously negative.

The past 50 years was a welcomed transition from the religious to the secular. Getting rid of religious imagery in public areas is breath of fresh air. Gone are the days of religious censorship, homosexuals sent to prisons, no more banned books and ideas. No more horrific abortions performed in makeshift clinics with fake doctors. But maybe not for long.....

A massive republican vote will bring all of that back in less than 20 years. Supreme court is already padded with conservative judges

 

[tyder001]

I'm 54 years old and I've never seen a homosexual put in prison for being homosexual. I've also never had a book banned and abortion is a personal decsion. I do understand people's sensabilties but it works both ways. Oh well, politics has to have a good and evil I guess. Problem is I'm not buying wholesell either side.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

I'm 54 years old and I've never seen a homosexual put in prison for being homosexual. I've also never had a book banned and abortion is a personal decsion. I do understand people's sensabilties but it works both ways. Oh well, politics has to have a good and evil I guess. Problem is I'm not buying wholesell either side.

During WWII there was a genius mathematician in the UK called Alan Turing. He was instrumental in creating the worlds first computing machine, and in cracking the dreaded German 'enigma' code. He also thought up the 'Turing test' in which he postulated that if a computer, by way of its answers to a human being's questions, could fool a man into thinking it was talking to another man and not a machine, the computer could be said to have true artificial intelligence. The Turing test is still applied to artificial intelligence today.
Anyway, this man did astounding work in cryptography, in total secrecy and without a drop of recognition, for all the Allies. Most historians (on both sides) agree that cracking the enigma code shortened the war considerably, thereby saving many, many lives. That alone should ensure his name is never forgotten. His groundbreaking work in computing cannot be underestimated.
This poor man however, had the misfortune to be born homosexual during a time when sex acts between two men were illegal. He was naieve enough to report a male lover stealing from him and not expect the police to pursue the sodomy conviction, completely disregarding the theft by who's reporting they came to the information about the homosexual acts. To be spared prison, Alan Turing had to agree to chemical castration. It altered his body and for him, much worse, it altered his once great mind. It did not alter his attraction to men.
At his wit's end over his public shame and his withered mind and changed body, he ate from an apple laced with potassium cyanide.
A great hero of all Allied nations from WWII was hounded to suicide because he was gay.
It shames me greatly to think this happened in my country not so long ago.
Many of you may be aware that some African countries are talking about introducing draconian anti-homosexual laws, with severe punishments.
Isn't it terrible that we repeat these same shameful policies again and again in this world.
I don't really understand homosexuality in that I do not feel attracted to men in any way but I fully believe some men do and if consenting, they are harming no one else. Please let's not ignore it if any countries introduce laws that may see the repeat of the appaling treatment meted out to Alan Turing.
gordon

 

[Ezechiel]

I'm 54 years old and I've never seen a homosexual put in prison for being homosexual. I've also never had a book banned and abortion is a personal decsion. I do understand people's sensabilties but it works both ways. Oh well, politics has to have a good and evil I guess. Problem is I'm not buying wholesell either side.

You're way too young, ask Gene he'll tell you all about it.

Where I live it was called the index.. this is barely 50 years ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_Librorum_Prohibitorum

Censorship and enforcement

The effects of the Index were at times felt throughout much of the Roman Catholic world. From Quebec to Poland it was, for many years, very difficult to find copies of banned works, especially outside of major cities. It had little effect, outside Italy, Spain, Portugal, Poland or Bohemia, in countries where the great majority of the population were not members of the Catholic Church. Isaac Newton used the work of Kepler, then on the Index, as the foundation for his theory of universal gravitation, which in turn significantly influenced the formation of modern physics.

LOL imagine if we brought this law back

In 1749, Peter Cartcel, a sailor aboard a ship in the Halifax harbour, stabbed Abraham Goodsides to death and wounded two other men. He was brought before a Captain’s Court where he was found guilty and sentenced to death. Two days later he was hanged from the yardarm of the vessel as a deterrent to others. [5] This is one of the earliest records of capital punishment in Canada. However, it is difficult to accurately state numbers of capital punishment since there were no systematic efforts to accurately record names, dates, and locations of executions until after 1867 and many records have been forever lost owing to fires, floods, or decay.[6]
In early years, offences such as treason, theft, burglary, rape, pedophilia, homosexuality, and unusual sexual practices like bestiality were considered punishable by death.[citation needed] Authority[who?] steadily increased the number of offences that were punishable by death in order to deter the number of crimes committed.[7] After being hanged, authority often left the body in public, usually covered with tar so that they could preserve them from weather.[8]

 

[mike]

Well, it's like I said. As in a Fantastic Four comic book, some ancient texts may tell a story containing real historical elements, such as the use of money, television, automobiles, and may even contain real historical characters, however the story of cosmic wars fought by fantastic creatures are purely fictional. Having read a lot of comic books and scared texts, it seems apparent that there is a real parallel there.

I received Jeffery Kripal's Mutants & Mystics, Science Fiction, Superhero Comics, and the Paranormal for X-mas and look forward to reading it. I think he may explore this notion a bit there. Others like Robert Price have talked about this aspect of ancient writings as well.

The stories told have some purpose within the cultural context, removing them from their native surroundings obfuscates that a great deal. Yeah, something can be mined from them, but they have to viewed for what they are and caution applied to any conclusions you may come to from reading them.

I agree comic books are not historical records, they are not yet old enough, they are contemporary records. A thousand years from now it will be a different story.
I'm not suggesting the bible is a "history book" any more than a map of tolkiens middle earth is a geography book. But they are imo historical records of a sort.
A thousand years from now a comic book while containing a fictional story and characters will still depict buildings, vehicles etc that will depict some of the things common "in that time"
Just as the bible can tell us what coinage/customs/foods/clothing were in use at the time it was written

But i'm sure we can both agree thats about as significant as they get to our modern society.

 

[mike]

During WWII there was a genius mathematician in the UK called Alan Turing. He was instrumental in creating the worlds first computing machine, and in cracking the dreaded German 'enigma' code. He also thought up the 'Turing test' in which he postulated that if a computer, by way of its answers to a human being's questions, could fool a man into thinking it was talking to another man and not a machine, the computer could be said to have true artificial intelligence. The Turing test is still applied to artificial intelligence today.
Anyway, this man did astounding work in cryptography, in total secrecy and without a drop of recognition, for all the Allies. Most historians (on both sides) agree that cracking the enigma code shortened the war considerably, thereby saving many, many lives. That alone should ensure his name is never forgotten. His groundbreaking work in computing cannot be underestimated.
This poor man however, had the misfortune to be born homosexual during a time when sex acts between two men were illegal. He was naieve enough to report a male lover stealing from him and not expect the police to pursue the sodomy conviction, completely disregarding the theft by who's reporting they came to the information about the homosexual acts. To be spared prison, Alan Turing had to agree to chemical castration. It altered his body and for him, much worse, it altered his once great mind. It did not alter his attraction to men.
At his wit's end over his public shame and his withered mind and changed body, he ate from an apple laced with potassium cyanide.
A great hero of all Allied nations from WWII was hounded to suicide because he was gay.
It shames me greatly to think this happened in my country not so long ago.
Many of you may be aware that some African countries are talking about introducing draconian anti-homosexual laws, with severe punishments.
Isn't it terrible that we repeat these same shameful policies again and again in this world.
I don't really understand homosexuality in that I do not feel attracted to men in any way but I fully believe some men do and if consenting, they are harming no one else. Please let's not ignore it if any countries introduce laws that may see the repeat of the appaling treatment meted out to Alan Turing.
gordon

Im well familiar with this case, and it is indeed an outrageous shame.

The reaction of Law enforcement is still happening in similar form in south africa today

"When you are raped you have a lot of evidence on your body. But when we try and report these crimes nothing happens, and then you see the boys who raped you walking free on the street."
Support groups claim an increasingly macho political environment led to inaction over attacks.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ected-to-corrective-rape-in-South-Africa.html

Oddly enough it was never a crime to be a lesbian in either england or australia, the reason being when the legislation was put before Queen Victoria she refused to accept a woman would do such a thing, thus only homosexuality was made illegal.
It was only made legal in the state i live in in 1984
When i first moved to Sydney you could be arrested for being gay
The armed forces only allowed gay and lesbians to serve in 1992, something only recently allowed in the US army, although if you read the military times forum, its not a popular decision in the majority of the ranks

 

[tyder001]

Ezechiel said: You're way too young, ask Gene he'll tell you all about it.

Way to young! I like the sound of that You are my new favorite poster. But, on a more serious note I'm gonna have to look up the Turing incident. That is a shame. I certainly don't want to hunt down and imprison anybody. I don't want to imprison religious folks or non religious or demonize anybody. Thanks for the information, I'll do a search for Turning.

 

[mike]

 

[mike]

This is funny

http://freethoughtnation.com/contri...the-sun-offending-muslims-and-christians.html

Though i thought george carlins take was funnier

"I've begun worshiping the sun for a number of reasons. First of all, unlike some other gods I could mention, I can see the sun. It's there for me every day. And the things it brings me are quite apparent all the time: heat, light, food, a lovely day. There's no mystery, no one asks for money, I don't have to dress up, and there's no boring pageantry. And, interestingly enough, I have found that the prayers I offer to the sun and the prayers I formerly offered to 'God' are all answered at about the same fifty percent rate."​

~George Carlin (1937-2008), American comedian​

​

 

[Goggs Mackay]

@mike - really nice video. I've seen plenty on Turing and Bletchley Park but not this one. Something else not many people know is that 'colossus' -the code-breaking computer, was basically mothballed for security reasons by the UK government. There were many patents that were not applied for because at that time, there was concern about a future enemy getting access to such code-breaking capabilities. They weren't to know that computing was to explode anyway!
I have had the pleasure of visiting Bletchley and personally, I got a real buzz from imagining all this vital cryptography happening in the grounds of this English country house!
gordon

 

[mike]

Another example

When I was given a DVD of a protest rally in the small town of King, near where I live, I was shocked by the sight of five thousand people waving Christian Flags and cheering one of the speakers when he said that everyone there should "encourage" those who weren't Christian in the area to move somewhere else.

http://freethoughtnation.com/contributing-writers/63-acharya-s/640-in-god-we-trust-documentary.html

 

[Ezechiel]

Another example



http://freethoughtnation.com/contributing-writers/63-acharya-s/640-in-god-we-trust-documentary.html

If that kind of insanity reaches critical mass we're all in very deep trouble ! Yikes !

 

[mike]

Its truly a bad scenario isnt it, mob mentality crossed with religious prejudice.
The crusades are a classic example.
Its the 21st century for crying out loud, and yet sunni's and shiites spill each others blood, as did catholics and protestants in ireland

At heart, Sunnis and Shiites are like Catholics and Protestants in the commonality of some fundamental beliefs. But their differences, especially in nations where the Sunni-Shiite split is exacerbated by each other's proximity (as in Iraq and Lebanon), run so deep that intolerance and violence shadow the two groups, making coexistence difficult.

Its as illogical as it is terrifying

They all believe in "one" god, creator of the universe, but will spill each others blood over things like what to call him, and what style of building he prefers to be worshiped in.

When i look at the sectarian violence in ireland of the last century, in the name of a god who's 6th commandment is thou shalt not kill..........

Perhaps the first one should have come last and the 6th one first

"I am the LORD your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt, from the house of slavery. You shall have no other gods in My presence..."