Church abducts and beats a gay man to exorcise him of his demons

[WelshBloke]

I said it, so now I'm legit. You said so.

So are you dead?
Did something pop up in the mirror and drag you in?
Did you feel a little bit silly?

I really want to know what he thought was going to happen.

 

[Azuma Hazuki]

@Puffnstuff: did you not read what I just wrote? Or was it too hard to understand?

Your God is a demon, and that makes you a devil-worshiper. No actual good God would demand worship, let along after doing the horrible things Yahweh did; he can't be anything but demonic, if he even exist. We're not laughing at you, we're horrified by you.

And why is this? Because you're essentially telling us that your have no actual morals, that you'll obey the biggest swingin' dick in the multiverse, simply because he can hurt you more than anyone else, infinitely in fact, for not obeying him.

Kissing up to the biggest bully on the playground is a shit insurance policy. What assurance do you have that Yahweh won't toss you into Hell for any reason or no reason at all at any time in all of eternity? You couldn't stop him. He doesn't need a reason.

And due to the law of large numbers, it is not only possible, not only likely, but absolutely certain that you will eventually be thrown into Hell. Why? Because anything that is not impossible has a probability of 100% of happening at least once as time T approaches infinity.

 

[sandorski]

So are you dead?
Did something pop up in the mirror and drag you in?
Did you feel a little bit silly?

I really want to know what he thought was going to happen.

My mouth moved, sounds came out. Apparently there's more to it now though. Maybe I need to light some candles in a particular pattern or something.

 

[WelshBloke]

My mouth moved, sounds came out. Apparently there's more to it now though. Maybe I need to light some candles in a particular pattern or something.

Bake a cake? That always gets people to turn up.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

Bake a cake? That always gets people to turn up.

Maybe that's why the bible thumpers do that crazy-ass crackers and wine thing. Better turn out if you're serving snacks.

 

[Blue_Max]

Or there's reality: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...60b1144cbc1_story.html?utm_term=.10a4f1b86a20

Sorry it's not a video, I know some people have a tough time reading.

Including yourself. Within the first few paragraph it even reads:

The Crusades lasted almost 200 years, from 1095 to 1291. The initial spark came from Pope Urban II, who urged Christians to recapture the Holy Land (and especially the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem) from Muslim rule.

Just like the video I showed, the islamic takeover was far, far, far greater and longer. The Crusades tried to take back some of what had been conquered and brutalized. No, it wasn't pretty - war is hell. Is it the "moral equivalent"? Not remotely.

 

[WelshBloke]

Maybe that's why the bible thumpers do that crazy-ass crackers and wine thing. Better turn out if you're serving snacks.

I'd turn up for free wine!

 

[Commodus]

Leave it to BM to justify committing one tragedy in response to another. It's like a grade school kid shouting "but he started it!" Never mind that the Crusades have helped oppressive governments and extremists both frame and justify their actions for centuries...

 

[xthetenth]

Leave it to BM to not even be able to provide an argument for why the tragedy he's using to justify his claims even existed or was equivalent, as well.

Including yourself. Within the first few paragraph it even reads:

The Crusades lasted almost 200 years, from 1095 to 1291. The initial spark came from Pope Urban II, who urged Christians to recapture the Holy Land (and especially the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem) from Muslim rule.

Just like the video I showed, the islamic takeover was far, far, far greater and longer. The Crusades tried to take back some of what had been conquered and brutalized. No, it wasn't pretty - war is hell. Is it the "moral equivalent"? Not remotely.

You're jumping from takeover to brutalization with no evidence. Do me a favor and find evidence of brutalization under Muslim rule, especially any that's worse than what the Crusaders inflicted. Because you haven't demonstrated any capacity for doing such, cite sources, but present arguments in your own words drawing from those sources. I don't think you can. I don't think you've ever been able to construct your own argument for something. You approach not from trying to understand but from trying to work it into your inner explanation for how the world works. Conclusions come after investigating the evidence, not before.

You're basically arguing equivalence from a perspective that because colors changed on a map in each case, everything's equivalent between the color changes and the only way of telling which color change is worse is which changed the color for longer. Also it seems like you're starting an unfair comparison here and hiding it in your assumptions.

Why is Eastern Rome implicitly a legitimate owner of Palestine? Last I checked, the Romans did actually brutally subjugate that area. Masada didn't gain relevance for nothing, after all, and when we call them the Jewish-Roman Wars, we have to number the Great Revolt, Kitos War and Bar Kokhba's Revolt. Can you provide evidence of similar long-running discontent between ruler and ruled under Muslim rule? The world didn't spring into existence at any point during Mohamed's lifespan.

As currently expressed, your idea of this provides no means of showing any government or state as being legitimate because you consider any territorial gain to be conquering and brutalization, a leap of propaganda even the people trying to start the Crusades for naked political gain didn't attempt. You really need to try harder than this.

There is a much more important and larger point being missed here: Divine Command Theory (the technical term for "God says what's right") is empty. It cannot and does not ground any system of morality, for the following reasons:

It almost seems unfair that you actually have some knowledge of philosophy.

 

[Sunburn74]

I'd like to see a church take a bunch of overweight, beer swilling, no-exercise, self-righteous WASPy males, tie them up to wooden stakes and beat them saying "Your body is the temple of the lord'. Whack! "Your body is the temple of the lord". Whack! "Are you going to stop masturbating every night to gangbang teen porn and eating cheeseburgers every day? No?!" Whack!. We will do this until we beat the "cheeseburger eating demons out of you". Whack!

 

[Puffnstuff]

I'd like to see a church take a bunch of overweight, beer swilling, no-exercise, self-righteous WASPy males, tie them up to wooden stakes and beat them saying "Your body is the temple of the lord'. Whack! "Your body is the temple of the lord". Whack! "Are you going to stop masturbating every night to gangbang teen porn and eating cheeseburgers every day? No?!" Whack!. We will do this until we beat the "cheeseburger eating demons out of you". Whack!

I nearly fell out of my chair when I read that.

 

[yoddle]

interesting, real life exorcism, thought that was just for the movies? Someone's been taking the holy bible is tad too literally I see.

 

[Puffnstuff]

interesting, real life exorcism, thought that was just for the movies? Someone's been taking the holy bible is tad too literally I see.

Brother the real exorcism occurs each and every time they pass the offering plate around to extract your evil cash from you. As for misinterpreting the bible, if they did take it literally their behavior would be completely different from what it is.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Brother the real exorcism occurs each and every time they pass the offering plate around to extract your evil cash from you. As for misinterpreting the bible, if they did take it literally their behavior would be completely different from what it is.

Tell us how you feel about tithe

 

[OatisCampbell]

Still and forever will be so very confused why any one would worship a God... any God that expresses and possesses (via scripture) such low, base, human qualities. These Gods depicted in these books are childish, ugly, full of hate and wrath, vengeful, petty, egotistical, arrogant, prone to tantrums, demanding, requires their children/followers to love and hate in very hypocritical ways with subjective translations apparently. How vey human of God. Heaven doesn't sound so grand if the trials must continue because God is having a bad day. He sounds horrible! Any way, the God I know and love don't roll like that. It is truly without judgement. It is pure love. It is a profound embrace. It is devine acceptance. It is what we are meant to learn and aspire to and fail because WE are fallible and God is not.

Some would say the anthropomorphization of God is necessary for us conceptualize something we have no frame of reference for.
Others might say the whole thing is social engineering and always has been, as the basic teachings of the church are largely positive and lead to more harmonious society.
Others might say that if someone is going to write a story, they can only write about what they understand. (i.e. mankind) "Well God is our father, a lot like us but wiser, you should listen".

Personally I agree that a being such as "God" likely wouldn't have petty human traits like jealousy, but I do think the church does far more good than harm.

I also think people in all religions (E.G. these folks) have a tendency to drape their own bad behavior in religion to try and rationalize it to themselves. "We beat up the gay guy not because he's different, but because the Bible says it's evil so we wanted to help God."

Hopefully the law doles out some assault and battery and wrongful imprisonment charges on these folks as a reminder to society "No matter what you think of your neighbor's lifestyle, you can't hold him/her against his/her will and smack them.".

 

[disappoint]

@Puffnstuff: did you not read what I just wrote? Or was it too hard to understand?

Your God is a demon, and that makes you a devil-worshiper. No actual good God would demand worship, let along after doing the horrible things Yahweh did; he can't be anything but demonic, if he even exist. We're not laughing at you, we're horrified by you...

I just want to point out that the "demon" you speak of in reality as far as I can tell are the flaws in human cognition and perception. Our job as humans, if we wish to make our lives and the world better is to discover those flaws and chip away at them. In this way we become less evil and more good, both as individuals and as a society.

 

[Younigue]

Some would say the anthropomorphization of God is necessary for us conceptualize something we have no frame of reference for.
Others might say the whole thing is social engineering and always has been, as the basic teachings of the church are largely positive and lead to more harmonious society.
Others might say that if someone is going to write a story, they can only write about what they understand. (i.e. mankind) "Well God is our father, a lot like us but wiser, you should listen".

Personally I agree that a being such as "God" likely wouldn't have petty human traits like jealousy, but I do think the church does far more good than harm.

I also think people in all religions (E.G. these folks) have a tendency to drape their own bad behavior in religion to try and rationalize it to themselves. "We beat up the gay guy not because he's different, but because the Bible says it's evil so we wanted to help God."

Hopefully the law doles out some assault and battery and wrongful imprisonment charges on these folks as a reminder to society "No matter what you think of your neighbor's lifestyle, you can't hold him/her against his/her will and smack them.".

I agree that church can serve an uplifting purpose but then why not just be a support group if only as a moral compass. I'm not opposed to people requiring a group setting to motivate good feelings, good thoughts and good deeds but churches with their doctrine are too often comprised of the perfect ingredients to encourage very unhealthy and devastating mass mentality toward hate and segregation even if they won't call it that. Organized religion is suspect in that it encourages reliance outside of oneself and [for me] a relationship with God is and should be personal if not private. I would prefer all churches be made in to self-help groups with an eye toward charity and good deeds. A God who requires its followers to worship or grovel does not sound like a God but rather an insecure being unworthy of worship. My God is at minimum as confident as I am. And so much better at stifling (in that it does not have to stifle human-like behavior at all) such human and fallible behavior. Every time I know I'm not being my best self... that's because God does not possess such ugliness and it resonates within me. Even sociopaths know that something is wrong even if they can't comprehend why.

I think I've gone on a ramble and possibly not even responded in a way that addresses what you were saying but that's what rambling is all about I suppose.

 

[Azuma Hazuki]

@xthetenth: er...sorry, I don't understand what this means. Why is it unfair? I studied hard, if not formally, to get that knowledge. I have no social life, few friends, and an obsessive mind, so it was only natural I'd get into epistemology...

 

[jackstar7]

@xthetenth: er...sorry, I don't understand what this means. Why is it unfair? I studied hard, if not formally, to get that knowledge. I have no social life, few friends, and an obsessive mind, so it was only natural I'd get into epistemology...

It's unfair because you're fighting a hyper-coward.

 

[Azuma Hazuki]

And yet, the cowards always return to fight more. It's exhausting. I wonder if I've been wasting energy on this. They don't seem to know when they've been bested.

 

[Puffnstuff]

I agree that church can serve an uplifting purpose but then why not just be a support group if only as a moral compass. I'm not opposed to people requiring a group setting to motivate good feelings, good thoughts and good deeds but churches with their doctrine are too often comprised of the perfect ingredients to encourage very unhealthy and devastating mass mentality toward hate and segregation even if they won't call it that.

I absolutely agree with you in that church should be to people who need to be uplifted just as a hospital is supposed to help the sick recover and overcome their illness or physical injury. If hospitals were run like that church they would look for people on the sidewalk and then beat them senseless because they needed patients.

 

[OatisCampbell]

I agree that church can serve an uplifting purpose but then why not just be a support group if only as a moral compass. I'm not opposed to people requiring a group setting to motivate good feelings, good thoughts and good deeds but churches with their doctrine are too often comprised of the perfect ingredients to encourage very unhealthy and devastating mass mentality toward hate and segregation even if they won't call it that. Organized religion is suspect in that it encourages reliance outside of oneself and [for me] a relationship with God is and should be personal if not private. I would prefer all churches be made in to self-help groups with an eye toward charity and good deeds. A God who requires its followers to worship or grovel does not sound like a God but rather an insecure being unworthy of worship. My God is at minimum as confident as I am. And so much better at stifling (in that it does not have to stifle human-like behavior at all) such human and fallible behavior. Every time I know I'm not being my best self... that's because God does not possess such ugliness and it resonates within me. Even sociopaths know that something is wrong even if they can't comprehend why.

I think I've gone on a ramble and possibly not even responded in a way that addresses what you were saying but that's what rambling is all about I suppose.

A "support group" doesn't provide the foundations upon which religion is built:
1. Hope for immortality.
2. Hope for an order to world, that makes sense that we're just not privy to.
3. Hope for protection for ourselves and loved ones.
4. Absolution of our transgressions.
5. Mechanism for community.
6. Mechanism for charity.

All of these are powerful psychological motivators, and largely "good" things.

When the Bible was written, there was need to populate the Earth to advance mankind, and Christian culture. So we get things like "spilling seed on the ground" (Onan), "Laying with a man as with a woman" (Leviticus), "be fruitful and multiply" (Genesis).

Nonetheless, people largely shouldn't kill others, commit adultery, steal, covet, etc and like it or not the origins of much of rule of law and our modern "morality" can be found in the Bible.

Whether Divine word or brilliant social planning or both, religion does far more good than harm.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

A "support group" doesn't provide the foundations upon which religion is built:
1. Hope for immortality.
2. Hope for an order to world, that makes sense that we're just not privy to.
3. Hope for protection for ourselves and loved ones.
4. Absolution of our transgressions.
5. Mechanism for community.
6. Mechanism for charity.

All of these are powerful psychological motivators, and largely "good" things.

While I'll concede that they can motivate weak-minded people, none of them are good things when applied to a religion

1) With the hope for mortality comes a disassociation with this world. Is it largely a good thing to mandate that people live in poverty, misery and willingly forego pleasures for supposed rewards that will never come? How is offering people immortality and 72 virgins working out for the world?

2) Blind hope for an almighty order that can't be seen, defined or explained is preferable to expecting and participating in an actual sensible real world order that can be explained, that is accountable to the people governed by it and is fair to everyone, even non-believers?

3) Hope for protection instead of actual protection? Which provides more protection, an alarm system or a prayer? What protects your health, a doctor or a priest? When your house is on fire do you turn to god or to the men in the red truck? And if you REALLY want protection, why on Earth would you turn to a god that hates you, thinks you're scum and wants to throw you in hell for eternal torment if you don't kiss his ass properly every day of your life? You need protection from what god might do to you more than you need protection from god for what other people might do to you.

4) Good idea!! Teach people that they can literally do ANYTHING and still get eternal reward just by saying you're sorry. No way that could possibly go wrong.

5) Religions "mechanism for community" is to welcome anyone that is willing to talk, act and think in the mandatory manner and to ostracize or even kill those who believe something else. That is the antithesis of community.

6) A mechanism for charity is simply wanting to be charitable. When you have organizations getting rich skimming donations while very very little help gets through to the truly needy (and then only to people who are deemed worthy by the charity itself, not by the donor, see point 5) that is much closer to a pyramid scheme than it is to charity. The Catholic Church didn't get that rich by being charitable, they got rich by convincing other people to be charitable and paying themselves huge commissions on the transactions.

 

[danzig]

I live very close to this place...similar type shit has been going on for at least 25 years

 

[xthetenth]

@xthetenth: er...sorry, I don't understand what this means. Why is it unfair? I studied hard, if not formally, to get that knowledge. I have no social life, few friends, and an obsessive mind, so it was only natural I'd get into epistemology...

It's unfair because DCT is so dreadful to begin with, somebody who actually legitimately knows what they're talking about (which is awesome by the way, and enriches the community) is just a comedic mismatch. I almost feel bad for your time getting used to tear that argument apart. Then again it cuts right to the heart of the issue.

(It might be idiomatic use. Not sure. The intention was complimentary of the fact that you actually know what you're talking about.)