tell2

August 8th, 2018

A resurrection from 2009. Innocent times.

└ Tags:

Discussion (17)¬

  1. Robin Barr says:
    August 8, 2018 at 2:22 pm

    I looked up apophatic. For apophatic prayer it said ” “Apophatic” prayer has no content. It means emptying the mind of words and ideas…” Seems to me by believing in a sky fairy, religious people have already emptied their minds.

  2. M27Holts says:
    August 8, 2018 at 4:08 pm

    Is this another religious gimmick to make the dogshit thick mullahs seem less stupid? You can’t polish a turd…

  3. HelenaHandbasket says:
    August 8, 2018 at 4:10 pm

    Negative theology is, politically, a good step (I mean for the unbelievers). I doubt if anyone got burned at the stake because they criticised a god who can’t be defined. I could be wrong. If anyone has any examples–lets have a look at them.

  4. tfkreference says:
    August 8, 2018 at 4:33 pm

    Strangely, those who argue that their god is unknowable seem to have no problem knowing what their god is not.

  5. Chiefy says:
    August 8, 2018 at 4:53 pm

    Good one!

    I tried to read an official Roman Catholic position on the Trinity. I got as far as “ineffable” and quit.

    Defining your imaginary supreme being always seems to devolve to a Superman vs Batman kind of argument.

  6. John Macdonell says:
    August 8, 2018 at 7:12 pm

    I looked up apophatic theology. Seems it restricts itself to saying what they consider god is not. So instead of saying “god is infinite”, they say “god is not finite”.

    Silence doesn’t seem to be required or encouraged in apophatic theology.

    This is over-simplified, I’m sure – maybe someone can correct me?

  7. Michael says:
    August 8, 2018 at 9:11 pm

    One thing I’ve noticed is that when someone claims to know what the unknowable, ineffable god is thinking that their god’s opinions and prejudices mirror those of his mouthpiece. Do you think this is a coincidence?

  8. Laripu says:
    August 9, 2018 at 2:49 am

    Lyrics from Monty Python.
    Doesn’t it all come down to this abject fear?

    O Lord, please don’t burn us,
    Don’t grill or toast your flock,
    Don’t put us on a barbecue,
    Or simmer us in stock,
    Don’t braise or bake or boil us,
    Or stir-fry us in a wok.
    Oh please don’t lightly poach us,
    Or baste us with hot fat,
    Don’t fricassee or roast us,
    Or boil us in a vat,
    And please don’t stick your followers, Lord,
    In a Rotissomat.

  9. richardelguru says:
    August 9, 2018 at 9:43 am

    We don’t want no effing ineffable gods round ‘ere!

  10. Someone says:
    August 9, 2018 at 10:58 am

    Interesting twist on “Do as I say, not as I do.”

  11. Deimos says:
    August 9, 2018 at 2:03 pm

    .

  12. Frank Lovell says:
    August 9, 2018 at 3:02 pm

    Trying to criticize-proof theology is is as hopeless as trying to pick up a turd by the clean end!

  13. Donn says:
    August 9, 2018 at 3:47 pm

    When I looked it up, “apophatic” seemed to be a term that was defined by not explaining what it meant. “Ineffable”, though, makes sense to me. Modern religions seem to prefer a deity that isn’t like a comic book superhero, an ordinary guy with extraordinary powers but who is always having trouble with his girlfriend, but rather something truly on another level – a level that we can’t reach, so the less said about it, the better. Yet it’s hard to sell that package, we can’t pretend to understand it well enough to give you any assurances about it or reasons to buy our religious products, so there’s the mystic bypass: we can tell you that the deity does drop by once in a while and treat you to some divine communication, the nature of which we’re unable to express, because, you know.

  14. HelenaHandbasket says:
    August 10, 2018 at 10:21 am

    Donn. You’ve just described the church of England. The CofE was the sort of religion we could all live with (a typical English politcal fudge, in other words, like Constitutional monarchy or regional parliaments–things that would unravel if you pursued them logically, so for gawds sake don’t do that).
    We thought we’d got rid of all the nutters. “Bye bye nutters!” we said as we waved them goodbye at Plymouth,”Go and be America! Have fun now, or rather–don’t”
    Then the nutters came back.
    There seem to be an endless supply.

  15. two cents' worth says:
    August 10, 2018 at 6:51 pm

    HH, unfortunately, not all of the nutters are returnees or newcomers. Some nutters are born into non-nutter families. The cause of their nuttiness is unclear (spontaneous generation? genetic mutation? something else?), and there may be multiple causes, even for a given case. Like the poor, it seems that nutters will always be with us.

    Seriously, given human nature, it’s impressive that there are people who aren’t nutters. Apparently, the human brain is are wired so that the emotional side is more powerful than the rational side. (See http://sourcesofinsight.com/the-elephant-and-the-rider/ .) It seems to me that education is one of the forces that determines whether someone is a nutter or not, but culture and/or a desire to fit into a particular group may be an even bigger force. (Which brings us back to the question of why someone from a non-nutter family would desire to fit into a group of nutters. I could go on and on… )

  16. HelenaHandbasket says:
    August 14, 2018 at 2:26 pm

    2 cents worth. I couldnt agree more. I used to believe that religion was all top-down nuttiness. Roughly, Richard Dawkins’ view that this would all go away if we stopped being so silly.
    I have had reason to revise this rosy view. For instance, 20000 women a year in the UK convert to Islam.
    No-one is making them do it. They don’t live in a caliphate. They aren’t being kidnapped by Isis. They aren’t even being converted by the ineffable beauty of the Q’ran. At least–none of those I have spoken to (and boy have I spoken to some) have been (that comes later–if it comes at all).
    No: They have looked at all of it–the belief in a vengeful patriarch who orders death and multilation, demands that they (the women) behave like sex objects in a world full of sexual incontinents (or “men” as they prefer to be called), the rejection of science and liberal values and they’ve gone: “Yep: I’ll have a big order of that please. With fries. Preferably fried kafirs”.
    Fascinating

  17. Suffolk Blue says:
    August 31, 2018 at 9:34 am

    Deimos – LOL

Comment¬

NOTE: This comments section is provided as a friendly place for readers of J&M to talk, to exchange jokes and ideas, to engage in profound philosophical discussion, and to ridicule the sincerely held beliefs of millions. As such, comments of a racist, sexist or homophobic nature will not be tolerated.

If you are posting for the first time, or you change your username and/or email, your comment will be held in moderation until approval. When your first comment is approved, subsequent comments will be published automatically.