Most Boring Rapture ever!

[satindesire]

Are there really people who can tell the future? How does one distinguish a false prophet from a real one? What is the difference between smart faith, and gullible faith? Does faith stop when doubts appear? When it costs a lot of money? When people make mistakes? Does it depend on how many other people believe the same thing? Don't worry, you don't have to answer.

That didn't answer my question. Were you claiming that my parents and my Dom are hypocrites, or not? I think it's rather nasty of you, if you did that, when someone tries to open up a friendly conversation with you and you go off half-cocked with that kind of ugliness, especially when I was just trying to make friends with someone I hadn't ever met before.

 

[satindesire]

How do you know that Harold Camping is more interested in deliberately manipulating people for personal gain than the individuals who wrote the bible?

I don't. But the people who wrote the bible are dead now and can't hurt anyone, plus, I wasn't there when "they" wrote the bible so I can't tell you anything about "their" frame of mine. Harold Camping is alive and active in his manipulations. Seems like he's a much more logical person to be upset at to me. I pick my battles. I don't have the time and energy to rail and rant at every "bad person" on the planet, and conversely, neither do you. I don't nitpick YOUR choices of what to be upset at and what not. I think you should do me the same respect.

 

[Netzach]

The slightest paying attention simply yields the fact that Jesus doesn't work Saturdays.

 

[satindesire]

The slightest paying attention simply yields the fact that Jesus doesn't work Saturdays.

JM: Well that's just silly...You have no PPRRRROOOOOOOFFFFF...

XD

 

[evesdream]

That didn't answer my question. Were you claiming that my parents and my Dom are hypocrites, or not? I think it's rather nasty of you, if you did that, when someone tries to open up a friendly conversation with you and you go off half-cocked with that kind of ugliness, especially when I was just trying to make friends with someone I hadn't ever met before.

I did answer the question, you're ignoring my answer in search of offense. Your parents being hypocrites? I'm actually not sure what your statement about hypocrisy had to do with what I'd said previously.

"Your parents, your dom, and Mussolini" those are three types of people who get to end it with "because I said so" and you can think of the you as the general "you" and the statement as tongue in cheek.

I'm talking about faith, not hypocrisy.

 

[BiBunny]

Preconceived notions projected onto a person who is actually having nothing of the sort.

Sorry to disappoint.

Don't waste your time. You know how this always goes, darling.

 

[satindesire]

I did answer the question, you're ignoring my answer in search of offense. Your parents being hypocrites? I'm actually not sure what your statement about hypocrisy had to do with what I'd said previously.

"Your parents, your dom, and Mussolini" those are three types of people who get to end it with "because I said so" and you can think of the you as the general "you" and the statement as tongue in cheek.

I'm talking about faith, not hypocrisy.

Can you see why I'm confused? This is how our conversation went, word for word, quoted in order=

Awesome, there are people right here on Lit who know this stuff for sure for sure? Hurry, who do I write the first cheque to?
....better not be fake for sure like the others.

I can think of three other types of people who get to end dialogue along the lines of "because I know so and said so".

Hypocrisy isn't just a religious creation. Nor is it a concept that only religious people have.

Food for thought.

Your parents, your dom, and Mussolini

And what exactly do you mean by that statement?

Are there really people who can tell the future? How does one distinguish a false prophet from a real one? What is the difference between smart faith, and gullible faith? Does faith stop when doubts appear? When it costs a lot of money? When people make mistakes? Does it depend on how many other people believe the same thing? Don't worry, you don't have to answer.

**************************************

Don't waste your time. You know how this always goes, darling.

Point taken.

 

[BiBunny]

My opinion is that after he incorrectly predicted the Rapture in 1993, he chose a date so far into the future that he thought he'd be dead when it arrived. (He is 89 years old, after all.) When it got here and he realized he was still alive, he had to go with it. Count on the next date for the Rapture being in, like, 2052 or something, so he doesn't have to answer for it when it doesn't happen yet again.

I was wrong. He's really determined to milk this cash cow as long as he can!

 

[JMohegan]

I don't. But the people who wrote the bible are dead now and can't hurt anyone, plus, I wasn't there when "they" wrote the bible so I can't tell you anything about "their" frame of mine. Harold Camping is alive and active in his manipulations. Seems like he's a much more logical person to be upset at to me. I pick my battles. I don't have the time and energy to rail and rant at every "bad person" on the planet, and conversely, neither do you. I don't nitpick YOUR choices of what to be upset at and what not. I think you should do me the same respect.

If the individuals who wrote the bible made the whole thing up for personal gain, I would say that the harm caused by their manipulations has extended well beyond the grave, and certainly exceeded anything Harold Camping has ever done. Tithings and inquisitions and wars and witch hunts and whatnot, right down to the homophobia and misguided sanctimony of so many christians today.

Not to mention the countless hours that millions have spent, Sunday mornings in uncomfortable pews.

As for Harold Camping, I've read nothing to indicate that he's any more, or less, manipulative than the Pope or the average Oklahoma preacher. Maybe he sincerely believes what he says. Who knows?

 

[evesdream]

Can you see why I'm confused? This is how our conversation went, word for word, quoted in order=













**************************************

Point taken.

Yup! Thanks for clearing that up!

 

[satindesire]

If the individuals who wrote the bible made the whole thing up for personal gain, I would say that the harm caused by their manipulations has extended well beyond the grave, and certainly exceeded anything Harold Camping has ever done. Tithings and inquisitions and wars and witch hunts and whatnot, right down to the homophobia and misguided sanctimony of so many christians today.

Not to mention the countless hours than millions have spent, Sunday mornings in uncomfortable pews.

As for Harold Camping, I've read nothing to indicate that he's any more, or less, manipulative than the Pope or the average Oklahoma preacher. Maybe he sincerely believes what he says. Who knows?

And your point is exactly what?

I didn't come into this thread with an agenda, JM. You're not changing my mind, I'm not changing yours. I didn't make this thread with the hopes of arguing my faith with you, hoping to change your mind. You came in here of your own violation posting TO ME DIRECTLY with your futile hopes that you're going to make some sort of point that'll "enlighten" me or maybe "show me up" and prove what an intellectually superior and better person you are than my "backwoods imaginings". I'm kind of sick of it, truthfully, I'm not hurting you with my faith so coming in here waving your textual pitchfork is just as misguidedly sanctimonious than the religious people you claim are so objectionable.

If you don't like it so much, and it causes you enough emotional upheaval to post pointlessly and argue endlessly about it, perhaps you should avoid threads like this?

 

[graceanne]

Brb preventing the end times by screaming about them. [/NotMakingAnySenseAtAll]

NOT ON MY WATCH

I was screaming? Wow, I'd LOVE to see where you found that. It seems to me that you're the one screaming, not me. I was joking about get. Grow a sense of humor.

If you don't like it so much, and it causes you enough emotional upheaval to post pointlessly and argue endlessly about it, perhaps you should avoid threads like this?

Honestly, I've gotten to the point of ignoring him when he goes on his religion rant. It's seriously becoming a case of protesting too much, and not worth the aggravation from me.

 

[satindesire]

Honestly, I've gotten to the point of ignoring him when he goes on his religion rant. It's seriously becoming a case of protesting too much, and not worth the aggravation from me.

I don't even understand where this crap comes from. He used to be nice to me, until he found out I was religious, now I'm a misguided sanctimonious person with goofy "imaginings" and no longer worthy of being respected.

 

[JMohegan]

And your point is exactly what?

I didn't come into this thread with an agenda, JM. You're not changing my mind, I'm not changing yours. I didn't make this thread with the hopes of arguing my faith with you, hoping to change your mind. You came in here of your own violation posting TO ME DIRECTLY with your futile hopes that you're going to make some sort of point that'll "enlighten" me or maybe "show me up" and prove what an intellectually superior and better person you are than my "backwoods imaginings". I'm kind of sick of it, truthfully, I'm not hurting you with my faith so coming in here waving your textual pitchfork is just as misguidedly sanctimonious than the religious people you claim are so objectionable.

If you don't like it so much, and it causes you enough emotional upheaval to post pointlessly and argue endlessly about it, perhaps you should avoid threads like this?

The only thing I've said about you personally, sd, is that you look silly for mocking people who are just as religious as you are.

Pitchfork? Hardly.

It's a conversation.

If you don't want people who disagree with your interpretation of a topic to post on your threads, perhaps it would be helpful to say so upfront.

 

[JMohegan]

I don't even understand where this crap comes from. He used to be nice to me, until he found out I was religious, now I'm a misguided sanctimonious person with goofy "imaginings" and no longer worthy of being respected.

Now, now, sd, let's not twist words.

I said that your imaginings are no more or less goofy than anyone else's.

 

[graceanne]

I don't even understand where this crap comes from. He used to be nice to me, until he found out I was religious, now I'm a misguided sanctimonious person with goofy "imaginings" and no longer worthy of being respected.

Yep, pretty much. But honestly, keep it all in perspective. It still boils down to this is a porn board, don't worry too much about what people think about you.

 

[ImOnIt]

Who was it on lit who owned the horse which defied the laws of physics? THAT made me laugh/weep/despair.

 

[satindesire]

The only thing I've said about you personally, sd, is that you look silly for mocking people who are just as religious as you are.

Pitchfork? Hardly.

It's a conversation.

If you don't want people who disagree with your interpretation of a topic to post on your threads, perhaps it would be helpful to say so upfront.

I haven't mocked anyone, and you have yet to come up with proof, so I'm just going to say this again. You're projecting your bias on other people, thinking that they're going to be just as sanctimonious as you are about your beliefs. I'm not going to let you come in here and tell me that I did something that deserved this "conversation", because I did not, and again, you cannot prove I did because it never happened.

I'm also going to repeat the fact that I didn't come into this thread with an agenda, unlike yourself, and if you want to argue some more you're going to have to come up with something more solid to stand on than "Nya Nya you're a stupid boobiehead!"

 

[ImOnIt]

Now, I like mediating things like this because it pertains to my job so I'm going to butt the fuck in and mediate (mediate the validity of ideas, and not to maintain relationships).

Firstly, your thread title. Most boring rapture, it wasn't even a rapture. That indicates to me the rapture-believers were misguided, plus the touch of ridiculosity/jest that their ideas deserve.

I am totally disappointed by the lack of zombies.

Again, very least this is jest, at the expense of the misguided rapture-advertising-people.

I couldn't agree that JMohegan was sanctimonious, projecting or childish (boobiehead), and the primary comments about the untold damage done by times past and present

Okay, I understand that. Maybe I need to ask this question:

Why come into a thread full of religious people and "Just say" that?

Because

In reality, we're going to be stuck suffering with everyone.

Is not so different from IN VALHALA WE DINE, or 'The world will end yesterday' except that we are now certain that the world did not end yesterday, so YESTERDAY'S rapture-proclaimers are totally disproven, whereas FUTURE rapture proclaimers may well have a point - and in a vacuum of ignorance, they do appear less reliable - if only because we are sure that 'the world will end yesterday' is false.

IN VALHALA WE DINE, or TWO BUSHELS OF NUBILE VIRGIN ATTENDANTS IN MY HEAVENLY PALACE or ASCEND WITH ANGELIC HARPS AS THE EARTH ROILS AND CHURNS

Yesterday's end-of-world-ascend-to-heaven mad prophets are just as reliable as the ones who choose a future date.

The thing is, in the interests of international trade and not killing everyone, some countries have agreed to 'LETS NOT EVEN TALK ABOUT RELIGION OK', and some have removed it from the duties of public servants. Separation of church & state.

In ordinary debate, you discuss evidence. Since this is metaphorical, metaphysical and imaginary, Valhala vs cloud palace vs ??? vs reincarnation is pointlessness of the highest order. You don't have to justify anything about your innermost secret beliefs about what happens after you die.

Finally - poos on the sect who says 'oh theres only 3,000 seats in heaven and everyone else goes into lava pits because my buddies get all the seats ehehehehehehehe. Thats wrong and worse, MEAN. It gets in the way of actually doing good things.

 

[satindesire]

Firstly, your thread title. Most boring rapture, it wasn't even a rapture. That indicates to me the rapture-believers were misguided, plus the touch of ridiculosity/jest that their ideas deserve. *snip*

Um no.

The title is "Most Boring Rapture Ever" in jest, like I'd been to "multiple raptures" and found the "lack of zombies from the previous ones" disappointing because the "zombies in the other raptures" were some form of entertainment. Not mocking the people who thought the rapture Saturday was real, that was never the issue and a quick look into this thread would make it quite clear it wasn't my intention of this thread in the least, since I haven't said one single word of mocking. I don't feel contemptous towards those people, I am angry that Mr. False Prophet told them lies and took their money. That is NOT mocking in the least.

Is not so different from IN VALHALA WE DINE, or 'The world will end yesterday' except that we are now certain that the world did not end yesterday, so YESTERDAY'S rapture-proclaimers are totally disproven, whereas FUTURE rapture proclaimers may well have a point - and in a vacuum of ignorance, they do appear less reliable - if only because we are sure that 'the world will end yesterday' is false.

IN VALHALA WE DINE, or TWO BUSHELS OF NUBILE VIRGIN ATTENDANTS IN MY HEAVENLY PALACE or ASCEND WITH ANGELIC HARPS AS THE EARTH ROILS AND CHURNS

Yesterday's end-of-world-ascend-to-heaven mad prophets are just as reliable as the ones who choose a future date.

In ordinary debate, you discuss evidence. Since this is metaphorical, metaphysical and imaginary, Valhala vs cloud palace vs ??? vs reincarnation is pointlessness of the highest order. You don't have to justify anything about your innermost secret beliefs about what happens after you die.

No, I don't have to, but I will respond when someone with a not-so-hidden agenda pokes at me with a stick to stir up the dramallama.

 

[ImOnIt]

Um no.

The title is "Most Boring Rapture Ever" in jest, like I'd been to "multiple raptures" and found the "lack of zombies from the previous ones" disappointing because the "zombies in the other raptures" were some form of entertainment.

So, in essence, the idea (oh, rapture again, I've had lots) which is O.K to mock instead of the troubled people who spent their money on billboards, car painting and bus shelters. (as I hear it, the orchestrator man was paternal, sincere and frugal)

Short: your thread title is funny because the notion is ridiculous. I don't put words in your mouth that you criticise the people, but I am sincerely unable to reduce the title in a way that would still be funny if there were no believers.


I get the feeling that more tactful heads than I are staying the fuck out of this thread.

 

[satindesire]

So, in essence, the idea (oh, rapture again, I've had lots) which is O.K to mock instead of the troubled people who spent their money on billboards, car painting and bus shelters. (as I hear it, the orchestrator man was paternal, sincere and frugal)

Short: your thread title is funny because the notion is ridiculous. I don't put words in your mouth that you criticise the people, but I am sincerely unable to reduce the title in a way that would still be funny if there were no believers.


I get the feeling that more tactful heads than I are staying the fuck out of this thread.

Again, more preconceived notions. I'm getting weary of explaining this to death.

The idea of mockery is to be CONTEMPTUOUS and hateful towards something/one. That is the Webster definition of mockery/mocking.

I have shown no ill will towards the people who believed in the Saturday Rapture. The only thing I have said specifically towards the people who follwed Harold Camping was that I didn't feel sorry for them because they should have looked at his track record with his Rapture predicitions and what the Bible said about the Rapture. That's not mocking them.

What I do feel is a sadness that they allowed the proverbial wool to be pulled over their eyes, once again reinforcing the anti-theist crowd's idea that we're all a collective bunch of basket cases, instead of seeing that the VAST majority of us are regular folk, like everyone else on the planet, religious or not.

Taking the mickey out of Harold Camping by saying "What a boring rapture! No zombies! I mean, come on!" is NOT mocking the people who followed him. It is showing some levity and humor in a bad situation, not "spitting on" the people who gave up everything to follow him.

The horse is dead.

 

[ImOnIt]

Again, more preconceived notions. I'm getting weary of explaining this to death.

The idea of mockery is to be CONTEMPTUOUS and hateful towards something/one. That is the Webster definition of mockery/mocking.

I have shown no ill will towards the people who believed in the Saturday Rapture. The only thing I have said specifically towards the people who follwed Harold Camping was that I didn't feel sorry for them because they should have looked at his track record with his Rapture predicitions and what the Bible said about the Rapture. That's not mocking them.

What I do feel is a sadness that they allowed the proverbial wool to be pulled over their eyes, once again reinforcing the anti-theist crowd's idea that we're all a collective bunch of basket cases, instead of seeing that the VAST majority of us are regular folk, like everyone else on the planet, religious or not.

Taking the mickey out of Harold Camping by saying "What a boring rapture! No zombies! I mean, come on!" is NOT mocking the people who followed him. It is showing some levity and humor in a bad situation, not "spitting on" the people who gave up everything to follow him.

The horse is dead.

Read what I said again, and reply to what I wrote. Replace mock with jest. It is funny because the idea is silly. The context by which I used mock, as in jape/jest/joke is the idea.

You may notice that I explicitly stated the beliefs or ideas were the point of jest, and explicitly not the followers.

So, in essence, the idea (oh, rapture again, I've had lots) which is O.K to mock (edit: jest with) instead of the troubled people

 

[satindesire]

Read what I said again, and reply to what I wrote. Replace mock with jest. It is funny because the idea is silly. The context by which I used mock, as in jape/jest/joke is the idea.

You may notice that I explicitly stated the beliefs or ideas were the point of jest, and explicitly not the followers.

Okay, yes, I see what you mean when you use the word "jest" or "joke" but I don't think of the word "mock" in the same way you do, I guess and there was our point of contention.

No, I wasn't really joking about the idea of the Rapture being silly because in my eyes, it's a nice wish...what I think is going to happen at the "end days" will be horrible, and if all of the "faithful" were taken up into heaven to avoid it that would be super cool. However, I don't believe it'll transpire that way in the least. Really the point of this thread was to tie in to the Zombie threads, I was more taking the piss out of Harold Camping for his failure to deliver the zombies.

This being Zombie Cultural Appreciation month, it was fitting from where I was sitting.

I am aware that rhymed but I didn't do it on purpose. :-/

 

[JMohegan]

I don't feel contemptous towards those people, I am angry that Mr. False Prophet told them lies and took their money.

I dont feel contemptuous towards you, I am angry that the individuals who wrote the bible cause a fuckload of trouble that endures to this day.

We are saying the same thing, the only difference being the different "prophets" discussed.

Clearly, criticizing a religious prophet is ok with you. So why your hostility in response to my remarks? The only thing I can come up with is that you are tremendously insulted at being compared to the followers of Harold Camping. But the comparison would only be insulting if you found them worthy of insult; otherwise you would be honored, or at the very least neutral about it.



eta: ImOnIt - thanks, and I heard that about the "orchestrator man" too. Very interesting fellow. And what I think some people of faith have a hard time understanding is that, to a non-religious person, "the Rapture will come on May 21st, 2011" sounds no more or less goofy than the notion of the virgin birth. The only difference I can see is not one of plausibility, but provability instead.