Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Biff the unclean · 01-23-2003, 12:37 PM

But devil's advocate Silent A�Maui-wareware-I-toa used a magic lasso that was a rope made from the fibers of the coconut tree that produced the coconuts that the first man and woman were created from by Kane-nui-a-rangi. Therefore the laws of physics do not apply because the rope was blessed by both Taranga and Makea-tutara.

"Oh man," cried the Sun, "what is it you do?" And he continued, "Would you cause the death of Tama-nui-te-ra?" And thus for the first time his full name was made known to man. Still Maui' beat him, until he promised to move more slowly along the heavenly path, so that Taranga might have a longer day for her labors.

The laws of physics were suspended for Joshua by Yahweh as much as they were for Maui by Makea-tutara�only Maui actually tells us how he did it which gives points to the Polynesian side.
The Sun actually talking is, of course, a metaphor. This is sometimes confused when the sacred writings of Kane are translated, as you would know if you spoke classical Tongatapu-ian.

Biff the unclean · 01-23-2003, 12:50 PM

Quote:

As long as christians can play the "god can do anything" and "you cannot comprehend the wisdom of god" cards they will always win the debate in their own minds.

No SA I wasn't talking about you. You hadn't even posted yet as I wrote that. But the bias I'm talking about is this very same wild card. As soon as it is played all knowledge of the natural world is suspended and a special case is made for their story. Any other subject at all, and the laws of nature apply again.

Silent Acorns · 01-23-2003, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Biff the unclean
The laws of physics were suspended for Joshua by Yahweh as much as they were for Maui by Makea-tutara�

:notworthy :notworthy :notworthy

Thank you Biff for explaining the truly wonderous powers of Makea-tutara.

:notworthy :notworthy :notworthy

May His glory shine to all the people of all the lands for all time ...

:notworthy :notworthy :notworthy

Biff the unclean · 01-23-2003, 01:15 PM

The discussion started as a "why don't you believe this Maui story over any given Christian story" type discussion, and turned very quickly to a "Well, in fact no one believes the Maui story any more because the evil Christians came along and forced them not to" discussion.
Not exactly. It wasn't why believe the Pagan over the Christian it was to point out that two sets of standards were being used on very similar stories.
It was a Christian who stated that you couldn't force someone to believe something or not. Since we were talking about a religion that had been forced out of existence by Christian Missionaries this seem particularly hypocritical.
Once again, if you don't like the history of Christianity then don't blame me, I'm not a Christian.

It seemed to me to be a change of subject, with the end result of drawing special attention to how Christians have wrongly murdered many pagans in the past.
The subject was deflected by a Roman Catholic who didn't really want to deal with it. It did still keep with Christian bias, I'll give you, just another sort of bias.

Of course I wouldn't say that Nazi's were right to kill Jews because maybe sometime a jew killed a Nazi, just as I didn't say that Christians were right to kill pagans, any time.
Just so long as nobody mentions the Christians.
You didn't answer my question; in fact you seem to have trouble following what I write. Is my grammar too abstruse for you? I could tone it down if you so require.
I noted that you complained that I said that Christians murdered a great many people for their beliefs but would not complain if I said that Nazis had done the same thing. That's a double standard, which is another way of saying a bias.

But please return to the OP. Would you judge both sets of stories by the same standards, if not why not?

ExChild · 01-23-2003, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Biff the unclean
But we are talking about the religion of Polynesia. Almost no one believes in Maui now because Christians told them that they would burn in Hell if they did.

Quote:

Well nobody can make anyone *not* hold a belief. Christians can share what they believe in but ultimately it was their choice to abandon a belief or maintain it.

Alright, I'll concede that your example of the Hellenists wasn't completely unrelated to what had been said. However, Aimee only replied to your mention of Christian persecution of the Maui, which, I'm sorry, seemed to come out of nowhere. I do agree with Aimee here that even if those people changed their religious practice under threat of death (excuse the semantics here) their underlying beliefs would be untouchable. But it seems this is off topic now. My apologies.

You didn't answer my question; in fact you seem to have trouble following what I write. Is my grammar too abstruse for you? I could tone it down if you so require.

Der, I guess it is, oh master of grammar :notworthy
In fact, I'm not sure which question I didn't answer. Please rephrase what I missed due to my limited intellect and I'll try to answer.

I noted that you complained that I said that Christians murdered a great many people for their beliefs but would not complain if I said that Nazis had done the same thing.

I did not complain that you said that Christians murdered people for their beliefs. This is true. It just seemed to me that you were using this as a means to generate emotional bias in this instance.

As for the OP: I have few reasons to believe this Maui myth, as I have found few reasons to believe stories from the OT. If I were a young child being told of how the sun was roped and slowed down, etc., I suppose there would come a time when I would question the truth of it, research it, and perhaps decide not to believe it.

Don't blame me for the history of the Christian Church either.

I'm just a former believer who still sympathizes with Christians....I guess it's a habit.

Thanks for bustin' my chops, Biff.
See ya.

Biff the unclean · 01-23-2003, 03:18 PM

Aimee only replied to your mention of Christian persecution of the Maui, which, I'm sorry, seemed to come out of nowhere.
Maui is mythical. The Christian destruction of the Polynesian religion and culture was carried out by Missionaries. They called it "saving" the Polynesian souls.
I do agree with Aimee here that even if those people changed their religious practice under threat of death (excuse the semantics here) their underlying beliefs would be untouchable.
Threat of death followed by, what we call today, brainwashing. You can certainly force people to change their beliefs. When you get them as children you don't even have to threaten them with physical death any more, just scare them with a story that you tell over and over. They grow into adults who never think to question the nonsense they have been fed.

Der, I guess it is, oh master of grammar
Again a reply that doesn't follow what I wrote.
I am of Ireland and so tend to write as I speak--which is to say, beautifully. Some Bible belters have difficulty with my sentence construction. But you leave me with the distinct impression that you see what you want to see, no matter what might be written. I would complain but since this is a thread about Christian bias I should thank you instead for strengthening my point.

As for the OP: I have few reasons to believe this Maui myth, as I have found few reasons to believe stories from the OT. If I were a young child being told of how the sun was roped and slowed down, etc., I suppose there would come a time when I would question the truth of it, research it, and perhaps decide not to believe it.
And the similar story about Joshua?

Don't blame me for the history of the Christian Church either. I'm just a former believer who still sympathizes with Christians....I guess it's a habit.
Former is it? It doesn't show.
Christians have done many things that are worthy of condemnation. Let it get around in Jackson that you are a former believer and they will be happy to demonstrate upon your body and person. It does no one a service to close your eyes to their bad points and tout only their good.

Amie · 01-23-2003, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Biff the unclean
First when you state that it is rude to tell a person that their beliefs are wrong. That isn't manners that is just you sticking your fingers in your ears.

completely false

Quote:

you just don't want to hear that you are wrong

My beliefs are my beliefs, they may not be right for you but they are right for me.

Quote:

while at the same time parading Catholicism before the Atheists.

Please show me where I have done so? I will not pretend to be something I am not. I am a catholic so I'll say I am, what is wrong with that Biff?

Quote:

Then to declare that anything is possible with God is again sticking your fingers in your ears. This time to every last thing we know about science.

I do not disregard science at all however I do believe in God. I see no problem there, works for me.

Quote:

And you have a fantasy about where Atheists come from.

Where are you getting all this from Biff? I am not sure why you think I have some fantasy. I ask questions because I am eager to listen to others viewpoints.

Quote:

Only a very few were lucky enough to be born in Atheist households.

yeah I am in love with one.

Quote:

The sun is a thermonuclear reaction that is 93,000,000 miles from Earth. The Earth spins on its axis at a rate of almost 1000-mph. To stop the Sun with a lasso or a prayer you would have to suddenly stop the Earth from turning. Inertia would destroy everything on the surface of the planet and play havoc with the core.
These are simple facts. Facts are "the truth." I am unwilling to sacrifice the truth for my comfortable superstitions. You seem not to have a problem glossing over the truth by wrongly (yes, I am saying that you are wrong, I'm not going to lie to you) declaring that anything is possible.

ok you think I am wrong, my beliefs are right for me. such is life. Take care Biff
Amie~

Biff the unclean · 01-23-2003, 04:36 PM

Amie I have no idea why you posted on this thread if you didn't want to participate in it. It seems rather disingenous.

Your beliefs are right for you and you don't care if they are factual or not is all I'm hearing. That's much the same sound that a mind makes as it snaps shut :banghead:

Amie · 01-23-2003, 04:52 PM

and you sir post assumptions and claim I say things I have never said. I have no idea why you do that.

Quote:

There is plenty of bias around here, all of it being shown by Christians.

For some strange reason you seem to think if people believe in God they throw knowledge out the window. Thats not the case Biff.
aw well carry on everyone...carry on...

Biff the unclean · 01-23-2003, 06:27 PM

There is nothing strange about the reason I think that. It's observation of irrational behavior.

01-23-2003, 12:37 PM	#31
Biff the unclean Banned Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: an inaccessible island fortress Posts: 10,638	Taboo But devil's advocate Silent A�Maui-wareware-I-toa used a magic lasso that was a rope made from the fibers of the coconut tree that produced the coconuts that the first man and woman were created from by Kane-nui-a-rangi. Therefore the laws of physics do not apply because the rope was blessed by both Taranga and Makea-tutara. "Oh man," cried the Sun, "what is it you do?" And he continued, "Would you cause the death of Tama-nui-te-ra?" And thus for the first time his full name was made known to man. Still Maui' beat him, until he promised to move more slowly along the heavenly path, so that Taranga might have a longer day for her labors. The laws of physics were suspended for Joshua by Yahweh as much as they were for Maui by Makea-tutara�only Maui actually tells us how he did it which gives points to the Polynesian side. The Sun actually talking is, of course, a metaphor. This is sometimes confused when the sacred writings of Kane are translated, as you would know if you spoke classical Tongatapu-ian.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-23-2003, 01:15 PM	#34
Biff the unclean Banned Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: an inaccessible island fortress Posts: 10,638	The discussion started as a "why don't you believe this Maui story over any given Christian story" type discussion, and turned very quickly to a "Well, in fact no one believes the Maui story any more because the evil Christians came along and forced them not to" discussion. Not exactly. It wasn't why believe the Pagan over the Christian it was to point out that two sets of standards were being used on very similar stories. It was a Christian who stated that you couldn't force someone to believe something or not. Since we were talking about a religion that had been forced out of existence by Christian Missionaries this seem particularly hypocritical. Once again, if you don't like the history of Christianity then don't blame me, I'm not a Christian. It seemed to me to be a change of subject, with the end result of drawing special attention to how Christians have wrongly murdered many pagans in the past. The subject was deflected by a Roman Catholic who didn't really want to deal with it. It did still keep with Christian bias, I'll give you, just another sort of bias. Of course I wouldn't say that Nazi's were right to kill Jews because maybe sometime a jew killed a Nazi, just as I didn't say that Christians were right to kill pagans, any time. Just so long as nobody mentions the Christians. You didn't answer my question; in fact you seem to have trouble following what I write. Is my grammar too abstruse for you? I could tone it down if you so require. I noted that you complained that I said that Christians murdered a great many people for their beliefs but would not complain if I said that Nazis had done the same thing. That's a double standard, which is another way of saying a bias. But please return to the OP. Would you judge both sets of stories by the same standards, if not why not?

01-23-2003, 03:18 PM	#36
Biff the unclean Banned Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: an inaccessible island fortress Posts: 10,638	Aimee only replied to your mention of Christian persecution of the Maui, which, I'm sorry, seemed to come out of nowhere. Maui is mythical. The Christian destruction of the Polynesian religion and culture was carried out by Missionaries. They called it "saving" the Polynesian souls. I do agree with Aimee here that even if those people changed their religious practice under threat of death (excuse the semantics here) their underlying beliefs would be untouchable. Threat of death followed by, what we call today, brainwashing. You can certainly force people to change their beliefs. When you get them as children you don't even have to threaten them with physical death any more, just scare them with a story that you tell over and over. They grow into adults who never think to question the nonsense they have been fed. Der, I guess it is, oh master of grammar Again a reply that doesn't follow what I wrote. I am of Ireland and so tend to write as I speak--which is to say, beautifully. Some Bible belters have difficulty with my sentence construction. But you leave me with the distinct impression that you see what you want to see, no matter what might be written. I would complain but since this is a thread about Christian bias I should thank you instead for strengthening my point. As for the OP: I have few reasons to believe this Maui myth, as I have found few reasons to believe stories from the OT. If I were a young child being told of how the sun was roped and slowed down, etc., I suppose there would come a time when I would question the truth of it, research it, and perhaps decide not to believe it. And the similar story about Joshua? Don't blame me for the history of the Christian Church either. I'm just a former believer who still sympathizes with Christians....I guess it's a habit. Former is it? It doesn't show. Christians have done many things that are worthy of condemnation. Let it get around in Jackson that you are a former believer and they will be happy to demonstrate upon your body and person. It does no one a service to close your eyes to their bad points and tout only their good.

01-23-2003, 04:36 PM	#38
Biff the unclean Banned Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: an inaccessible island fortress Posts: 10,638	Amie I have no idea why you posted on this thread if you didn't want to participate in it. It seems rather disingenous. Your beliefs are right for you and you don't care if they are factual or not is all I'm hearing. That's much the same sound that a mind makes as it snaps shut :banghead:

01-23-2003, 06:27 PM	#40
Biff the unclean Banned Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: an inaccessible island fortress Posts: 10,638	There is nothing strange about the reason I think that. It's observation of irrational behavior.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.