I am fasting today

[ForumMaster]

really? i didn't know. o well. i barely ate anything today anyway...

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: ForumMaster
really? i didn't know. o well. i barely ate anything today anyway...

You're not daati anyway, are you?

 

[montypythizzle]

Presence is just agitated because he has no muffinz....

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: montypythizzle
Presence is just agitated because he has no muffinz....

Aside from a bit of a headache, I'm fine. Not agitated at all.

 

[child of wonder]

Originally posted by: ThePresence
Incorrect. I am not defending my religion to anyone. I am saying that I find it more compelling than some guy's assertiong that it's no different than spinning around in circles.

Ha. The reasons I follow Judaism are way too long and complex for an internet forum, and the truth is, I didn't want to get into this here. Rest assured it's not because of the way I was raised. I have studied this extensively for many years, and attended Rabbinical Seminary as well. This is not something I thought of sitting on the bus one day.

I have very valid reasons for doing things the way I do. Antiquity is not any of them.

In this particular post you defended the tradition because of its age:

Originally posted by: ThePresence
Let me see... a 3000 year heritage and tradition or your opinion.... hmmmm... I think I'll go with the former.

While you may not embrace the tradition merely due to its age, in that instance you defended it due to its age. That's why I spoke up.

If you have valid reasons for believing in Judaism I'd be honored to hear them.

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: child of wonder
In this particular post you defended the tradition because of its age:

Originally posted by: ThePresence
Let me see... a 3000 year heritage and tradition or your opinion.... hmmmm... I think I'll go with the former.

While you may not embrace the tradition merely due to its age, in that instance you defended it due to its age. That's why I spoke up.

If you have valid reasons for believing in Judiasm I'd be honored to hear them.

I was not defending my religion. I was showing why I think it's alot more compelling than someone guy's idea that it's just like running around in circles. And yes, it's age does make it more compelling to me. But that is not any of the reasons I believe what I do at all.

 

[child of wonder]

Originally posted by: ThePresence
I was not defending my religion. I was showing why I think it's alot more compelling than someone guy's idea that it's just like running around in circles. And yes, it's age does make it more compelling to me. But that is not any of the reasons I believe what I do at all.

I said you were defending the tradition in the post I referenced to based on its age.

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: child of wonder
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: ThePresence
I was not defending my religion. I was showing why I think it's alot more compelling than someone guy's idea that it's just like running around in circles. And yes, it's age does make it more compelling to me. But that is not any of the reasons I believe what I do at all.</end quote></div>

I said you were defending the tradition in the post I referenced to based on its age.

*sigh*
I wasn't defending anything. This is becoming circular.

 

[Greyd]

Originally posted by: child of wonder
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: SampSon

Would you just stfu? Trolling went out in 1997.

</end quote></div>

I'm not trolling. I'm not trying to personally attack anyone simply for pleasure. I'm pointing out the logically fallacy of following a tradition merely because it's old.


<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: elmro

Do you get some kind of perverse pleasure sh*tting on someone else's beliefs, especially when they don't affect you in the slightest?

</end quote></div>

There is no pleasure involved. However, following a tradition simply because it's old is a logical fallacy.

If someone truly believes in a religion and is willing to dedicate their life to it, shouldn't they have a better reason for doing so than "it's old" or "it's how I was raised?"


<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: ThePresence

Certainly not.
I am not an ancient Egyptian, so their practices are meaningless to me.
I am Jewish, so Jewish tradition means alot to me.
I think it silly for someone to assume that because he thinks it's strange that I should abandon my 3000 year-old beliefs and equate it with running around and barking.
I was only answering for myself.
Anyone else is free to believe what they will.

</end quote></div>

I didn't argue if you were Egyptian. You defended your tradition based on its age. That is a logical fallacy.
I am of German and Dutch descent but there are no traditions from those countries or heritage that hold any value to me.
They're not "your" 3,000 year old beliefs, they are those of a religion. I take it you were raised Jewish. What other reasons do you have for following the faith besides it being what your parents taught you or its age?

People can believe whatever they want. However, they should have good reason for their believes beyond its age or simply because it's how they were raised. If those were valid reasons we would all be worshiping the Sun.

No, in fact you ARE being a trolling jerk. You ASSumed that he was "promoting" or "defending" his religion and then decided to attack. You're not the first person to have the knee jerk reaction of attacking anyone with a religious view with your so called "logic." Don't try to mask your trolling by painting it as anything less than what it is - we've seen it before many many times on this board - we're not fooled.

 

[child of wonder]

Originally posted by: ThePresence

*sigh*
I wasn't defending anything. This is becoming circular.

When your only response to any point is "nuh uh!!!!" then, yes, this is becoming circular.

 

[child of wonder]

Originally posted by: Greyd
No, in fact you ARE being a trolling jerk. You ASSumed that he was "promoting" or "defending" his religion and then decided to attack. You're not the first person to have the knee jerk reaction of attacking anyone with a religious view with your so called "logic." Don't try to mask your trolling by painting it as anything less than what it is - we've seen it before many many times on this board - we're not fooled.

Yes, his "3000 year" post was a defense of his tradition.

Defend: (from Webster) to maintain or support in the face of argument or hostile criticism.

If anyone thinks his post was not in defense of his tradition, then they do not have a firm grip on the English language.

And my "so called logic" was to point out he was committing an argumentum ad antiquitatem, or Appeal to Tradition, which is a common logical fallacy.

 

[DangerAardvark]

I'm as scornful of religion as the next guy, but... there's a time and place...

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: child of wonder
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: ThePresence

*sigh*
I wasn't defending anything. This is becoming circular.</end quote></div>

When your only response to any point is "nuh uh!!!!" then, yes, this is becoming circular.

That wasn't my response, and if you'd read through the thread again with an open mind, you'd see that. But here, I'll break it down for you. I mentioned that I'm fasting due my religious beliefs. Someone said that it's the same thing as twirling in circles. I said that when I balance one against the other, one has a 3000 year tradition and the other is some dude's fly-by-night comparison, I'll take the former. Now I'm not defending my religion or tradtion because it was never attacked (by him). I'm stating why I find it much more compelling and interesting than his bright ideas. More worth looking into. Simple as that.

 

[Regs]

I ate and god still loves me.

 

[child of wonder]

Originally posted by: ThePresence
That wasn't my response, and if you'd read through the thread again with an open mind, you'd see that. But here, I'll break it down for you. I mentioned that I'm fasting due my religious beliefs. Someone said that it's the same thing as twirling in circles. I said that when I balance one against the other, one has a 3000 year tradition and the other is some dude's fly-by-night comparison, I'll take the former. Now I'm not defending my religion or tradtion because it was never attacked (by him). I'm stating why I find it much more compelling and interesting than his bright ideas. More worth looking into. Simple as that.

You just confirmed exactly what I've been saying all along.

You defended your tradition by calling upon its age.

Again... READ THE DEFINITION OF "DEFEND." Also look up what the logical fallacy "Appeal to tradition" means.

Since you obviously can't be reasoned with, I'll refrain from posting on this matter any further.

My apologies for disrupting the thread. Best wishes to you on your day of fasting.

 

[Gunslinger08]

Originally posted by: child of wonder
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Greyd
No, in fact you ARE being a trolling jerk. You ASSumed that he was "promoting" or "defending" his religion and then decided to attack. You're not the first person to have the knee jerk reaction of attacking anyone with a religious view with your so called "logic." Don't try to mask your trolling by painting it as anything less than what it is - we've seen it before many many times on this board - we're not fooled.</end quote></div>

Yes, his "3000 year" post was a defense of his tradition.

Defend: (from Webster) to maintain or support in the face of argument or hostile criticism.

If anyone thinks his post was not in defense of his tradition, then they do not have a firm grip on the English language.

And my "so called logic" was to point out he was committing an argumentum ad antiquitatem, or Appeal to Tradition, which is a common logical fallacy.

Could you be more of a douche? Geez, the guy just wanted to tell us about his fasting for a religious holiday. This isn't a ***** semantics class. Get over yourself.

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: child of wonder
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: ThePresence
That wasn't my response, and if you'd read through the thread again with an open mind, you'd see that. But here, I'll break it down for you. I mentioned that I'm fasting due my religious beliefs. Someone said that it's the same thing as twirling in circles. I said that when I balance one against the other, one has a 3000 year tradition and the other is some dude's fly-by-night comparison, I'll take the former. Now I'm not defending my religion or tradtion because it was never attacked (by him). I'm stating why I find it much more compelling and interesting than his bright ideas. More worth looking into. Simple as that.</end quote></div>

You just confirmed exactly what I've been saying all along.

You defended your tradition by calling upon its age.

Again... READ THE DEFINITION OF "DEFEND." Also look up what the logical fallacy "Appeal to tradition" means.

Since you obviously can't be reasoned with, I'll refrain from posting on this matter any further.

My apologies for disrupting the thread. Best wishes to you on your day of fasting.

I obviously can't be reasoned with? You inferred that from this thread? Wow.
Let me just explain for those who are reading and are able to keep an open mind.
I wasn't defending my religion based on it's age. I was saying that because of it's age it's certainly, in my eyes, more compelling than some random guys off-the-cuff comment. It's really that simple.

 

[Kadarin]

Originally posted by: Zysoclaplem
Religious traditions are so silly.

Pulled from here, but I've seen this posted on other sources:

1. We make rules based on reasons that make a lot of sense.
2. We follow these rules.
3. Time passes, and things change.
4. The original reasons for the generation of these rules may no longer exist, but because the rules are still in place, we continue to follow them.

This is illustrated by the classic monkeys in a cage story:

Start with a cage containing five monkeys.

In the cage, hang a banana on a string and put stairs under it. Before long, a monkey will go to the stairs and start to climb towards the banana.

As soon as he touches the stairs, spray all of the monkeys with cold water.

After a while, another monkey will make an attempt with the same response - all of the monkeys are sprayed with cold water. Keep this up for several days.

Turn off the cold water.

If, later, another monkey tries to climb the stairs, the other monkeys will try to prevent it even though no water sprays them.

Now, remove one monkey from the cage and replace it with a new one.

The new monkey sees the banana and wants to climb the stairs. To his horror, all of the other monkeys attack him. After another attempt and attack, he knows that if he tries to climb the stairs, he will be assaulted.

Next, remove another of the original five monkeys and replace it with a new one. The newcomer goes to the stairs and is attacked. The previous newcomer takes part in the punishment with enthusiasm.

Replace the third original monkey with a new one. The new one makes it to the stairs and is attacked as well. Two of the four monkeys that beat him have no idea why they were not permitted to climb the stairs, or why they are participating in the beating of the newest monkey.

After replacing the fourth and fifth original monkeys, all the monkeys which have been sprayed with cold water have been replaced. Nevertheless, no monkey ever again approaches the stairs.

Why not?

"Because that's the way it's always been done around here."

That explains "tradition" pretty well.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: ThePresence
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Zysoclaplem
Well I am gonna hold my breath for 30 seconds and then bark like a dog while spinning in circles. It's a religious thing.

Religious traditions are so silly. </end quote></div>

Let me see... a 3000 year heritage and tradition or your opinion.... hmmmm... I think I'll go with the former.

Throwing people down a volcano is also probably a 3000 year old tradition. It doesn't mean it makes sense.

 

[Excelsior]

Yeah, I agree. But...this def isn't the place.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: ThePresence
I think it silly for someone to assume that because he thinks it's strange that I should abandon my 3000 year-old beliefs

Wow, you don't look a hair over 40. There's no way you're 3000. No way.

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: ThePresence
I think it silly for someone to assume that because he thinks it's strange that I should abandon my 3000 year-old beliefs</end quote></div>

Wow, you don't look a hair over 40. There's no way you're 3000. No way.

The beliefs are 3000 years old. I share those beliefs. Hence, my 3000 year old beliefs.
But you understood that. You thought you'd be cute. Congrats, you did it. You were cute. Well done.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Ha. The reasons I follow Judaism are way too long and complex for an internet forum, and the truth is, I didn't want to get into this here. Rest assured it's not because of the way I was raised. I have studied this extensively for many years, and attended Rabbinical Seminary as well. This is not something I thought of sitting on the bus one day.

These are the same reasons that people of any faith will claim. It's not because they were raised that way (although that's probably the real reason), it's because they searched for themselves and discovered that the best religion happens to be the one that they already are.

 

[Platypus]

What the fvck guys...... he has his belief, you have yours.. see how that works?

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: ThePresence
The beliefs are 3000 years old. I share those beliefs. Hence, my 3000 year old beliefs.
But you understood that. You thought you'd be cute. Congrats, you did it. You were cute.

I used to be cute when I was a little kid, but I'm ugly now.