An FYM Poll

[A_Wanderer]

Lets find out how Godless FYM really is

 

[diamond]

yes He did and He's coming back.

<>

 

[corianderstem]

Look busy!

 

[indra]

There's no negative equivalent for "yes, he did" without being snarky in your poll. I suggest you make the possible selections less bitchy.

 

[corianderstem]

I took the whole poll as this:

a) I'm a Christian and interpret the Bible literally

b) I don't believe in the Bible

c) I'm a Christian (or spiritually inclined) but don't think the Bible is meant to be taken literally.

I didn't think it was particularly bitchy, but maybe it was just my interpretation.

 

[diamond]

Look busy!

no need to.



<>

 

[corianderstem]

Oh, thank god.

*goes back to couch to watch TV*

 

[diamond]

I will keep you posted.


<>

 

[diamond]

so far we're 1 for 8.

<>

 

[LemonMelon]

There's no negative equivalent for "yes, he did" without being snarky in your poll. I suggest you make the possible selections less bitchy.

A_W appearing humble or genuinely inquisitive towards FYM's unwashed masses is rarer than a snowflake in Death Valley.

 

[diamond]

A_W appearing humble or genuinely inquisitive towards FYM's unwashed masses is rarer than a snowflake in Death Valley.

q
f
t

 

[A_Wanderer]

I took the whole poll as this:

a) I'm a Christian and interpret the Bible literally

b) I don't believe in the Bible

c) I'm a Christian (or spiritually inclined) but don't think the Bible is meant to be taken literally.

I didn't think it was particularly bitchy, but maybe it was just my interpretation.

Thats what I was going for, I voted figurative, the mythology isn't pointless.

 

[financeguy]

A_W appearing humble or genuinely inquisitive towards FYM's unwashed masses is rarer than a snowflake in Death Valley.

An inquisitive frame of mind and rejection of illogical or absurd viewpoints are not mutually exclusive, neither is there any particular point to being humble just for the sake of currying favour.

 

[LemonMelon]

An inquisitive frame of mind and rejection of illogical or absurd viewpoints are not mutually exclusive, neither is there any particular point to being humble just for the sake of currying favour.

Absolutely. Discussing the mysteries of the universe with a dullard would be a pointless endeavor, and I wouldn't waste my time either...

(the following rant is not addressed to you, financeguy, but the forum as a whole; I agreed with your above point, although I don't believe it to be entirely applicable to A_W)

...but I would like someone to point me towards a thread started by A_W where he didn't already believe he had the answer coming in, a thread that wasn't created to prove a point he made in an older thread, or a thread not created for the expressed purpose of riling up the bane of his existence, the religious Right. Just something, you know, pertinent, and not weighed down with his baggage.

Please keep in mind that I'm not bashing the guy because our opinions in many areas, sociological and theological included, are polar opposites, nor am I bashing him because his opinions are more informed than thou. Rather, I'm bashing him because he seldom asks a question that he doesn't believe to be rhetorical.

This thread is an excellent example of the third type of A_W thread listed above. "Lets find out how Godless FYM really is " What is the purpose here? I know that only he would be interested to find out the answer to the proposed question (who else would have any desire to ask it in the first place?), and even if someone else is mildly curious, he put it in such deliberately incendiary terms that it's nearly inaccessible. Does he want this thread to be locked? Judging from his join date, he should know better. This leads me to one conclusion: he's being deliberately incendiary. The least he could have done was title the thread in such a way that those who weren't interested could avoid it if they so desired.

Again, it's not so much THIS thread that bothers me as it is the pattern I've observed. A_W is a very intelligent individual, one of the sharpest in the forum (and FYM specifically, considering he rarely ventures out of here these days, another possible reason he started this thread in FYM instead of The Goal Is Soul, where it belongs, and would be of more interest), but that doesn't give him a license to be an ass. Yeah, I know, I should ignore his threads. He would appreciate that, and I likely will from now on. However, I felt I should get this out in the open, since there is hardly any discernible purpose for this thread's existence anyway.

 

[financeguy]

I disagree with A_Wanderer on a lot, but one thing I completely agree with him on is the benefits of having a free-for-all debate and letting the best ideas win in what is sometimes called 'the marketplace of ideas'.

Let's have more threads advocating Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Satanism, whatever. I would like to see threads from people advocating actual Marxist-Leninism (we have a few, but they mainly lurk, which is rather a pity), I would like Islamists to come on the forum and explain their point of view, I would like Likudniks to come on the forum and explain theirs. I would like to see the most extreme right wing viewpoint do battle with the most extreme left wing viewpoint.

What passes for left wing thought on the forum is sometimes worryingly close to 'ohmigod, Obama rocks, and if you don't agree, you're a beastly right wing c***, and you're probably a closet racist too', what passes for right wing thought seems to be some agenda to bash gays that I'm not interested in, or alternatively Strongbow's rubbishy propaganda.

 

[A_Wanderer]

Absolutely. Discussing the mysteries of the universe with a dullard would be a pointless endeavor, and I wouldn't waste my time either...

(the following rant is not addressed to you, financeguy, but the forum as a whole; I agreed with your above point, although I don't believe it to be entirely applicable to A_W)

...but I would like someone to point me towards a thread started by A_W where he didn't already believe he had the answer coming in, a thread that wasn't created to prove a point he made in an older thread, or a thread not created for the expressed purpose of riling up the bane of his existence, the religious Right. Just something, you know, pertinent, and not weighed down with his baggage.

Please keep in mind that I'm not bashing the guy because our opinions in many areas, sociological and theological included, are polar opposites, nor am I bashing him because his opinions are more informed than thou. Rather, I'm bashing him because he seldom asks a question that he doesn't believe to be rhetorical.

This thread is an excellent example of the third type of A_W thread listed above. "Lets find out how Godless FYM really is " What is the purpose here? I know that only he would be interested to find out the answer to the proposed question (who else would have any desire to ask it in the first place?), and even if someone else is mildly curious, he put it in such deliberately incendiary terms that it's nearly inaccessible. Does he want this thread to be locked? Judging from his join date, he should know better. This leads me to one conclusion: he's being deliberately incendiary. The least he could have done was title the thread in such a way that those who weren't interested could avoid it if they so desired.

Again, it's not so much THIS thread that bothers me as it is the pattern I've observed. A_W is a very intelligent individual, one of the sharpest in the forum (and FYM specifically, considering he rarely ventures out of here these days, another possible reason he started this thread in FYM instead of The Goal Is Soul, where it belongs, and would be of more interest), but that doesn't give him a license to be an ass. Yeah, I know, I should ignore his threads. He would appreciate that, and I likely will from now on. However, I felt I should get this out in the open, since there is hardly any discernible purpose for this thread's existence anyway.

I wouldn't post in The Goal is Soul for the same reason I don't start arguing with people in Churches, it would be unjustifiably rude (in most cases). Your getting defensive when you don't have to justify yourself or your beliefs, neither of us would gain anything if you choose to ignore my threads, but thats your prerogative.

I would bet that most people on FYM are liberal Christians, not atheists or agnostics, but people who for any number of reasons believe in God, agree with the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth but don't believe in miracles. A poll like this teases out those opinions and without making a value judgement of those beliefs. If I assumed that every Christian believed in miracles and special creation it would be exceptionally condescending and arrogant, as it stands most people I talk to are level headed and adhere to a tradition or lifestyle they find rewarding without believing absurdities (and yes believing second hand tales of improbable events recorded millennia ago in a literal sense does betray a persons credulity).

I don't need to display false modesty or feel that I need to play meek and mild to convey my opinions. The fact is that I am barely aware of how ignorant I am, but I am honest enough to admit it, I'm not staking a claim of absolute truth on the basis of supposed revelation. The nature of the universe is an open question, one which is engaging enough, I don't see why we shouldn't find out what others believe or force ourselves to question our assumptions.

 

[purpleoscar]

I disagree with A_Wanderer on a lot, but one thing I completely agree with him on is the benefits of having a free-for-all debate and letting the best ideas win in what is sometimes called 'the marketplace of ideas'.

Hear, Hear!

 

[LemonMelon]

I don't need to display false modesty or feel that I need to play meek and mild to convey my opinions. The fact is that I am barely aware of how ignorant I am, but I am honest enough to admit it, I'm not staking a claim of absolute truth on the basis of supposed revelation.

I don't believe this shines through particularly well in your posts, to be frank (or, at the very least, you often manage to accentuate the "I don't feel the need to play meek and mild" over the considerably more humble "I'm not staking a claim of absolute truth on the basis of supposed revelation", which is your prerogative, and mine to comment on it). Obviously, I wouldn't have said a word otherwise.

Part of the problem here is that our assumptions on the belief systems of interference users differ. I personally believe that FYM is largely agnostic/skeptic (though hardly "Godless", which would be sensationalizing and borderline absurd); this leaves me wondering what the point is behind a thread like this. The Goal Is Soul...hahaha...I would never compare that to a church. At all. It's a place to discuss religious topics, sure, but I've never felt a conservative close-mindedness there. I honestly believe that this would have been an intriguing topic to bring up there, and the results would be considerably less slanted. Just an opinion of course, based on my own observations, which is likely not the absolute truth, and I realize that.

I appreciate that you took the time to lay out your reasoning for this thread though, don't doubt that. I honestly wish you would have made this clear from the start; perhaps this confrontation could have been postponed (or avoided entirely).

 

[anitram]

I would bet that most people on FYM are liberal Christians, not atheists or agnostics, but people who for any number of reasons believe in God, agree with the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth but don't believe in miracles. A poll like this teases out those opinions

If you already know the answer, then what's the point?

In any case, this is a poorly structured poll; there is no choice for "none of the above." I don't agree with any of the 3 choices.

 

[A_Wanderer]

I don't know the answer and I wasn't able to edit the poll.

 

[anitram]

I would have added the obviously missing choice of "I don't know". In any event, that would have been my vote.

Actually scratch that, it's more like "I don't know and I don't care." I just don't think it's really of any importance to Christian belief, although I know many people will disagree. Much like I don't care and don't know whether he walked on water or did any of the other things.

 

[diamond]

I was close to doing a poll like this.

I would venture to say the people who voted that Christ ascended into Heaven are for Prop 8.

Those that are opposed to Prop 8 voted the other 2 choices or none of the above.

<>

 

[VintagePunk]

I personally believe that FYM is largely agnostic/skeptic

For what it's worth, I've never had that impression at all. There have been some atheist/agnosticism threads in here in the past, and I've always had the impression that we're a small minority in FYM. Maybe since the forum's going through a lull and things are slower in here now, the numbers have shifted though.

 

[Pearl]

I wouldn't post in The Goal is Soul for the same reason I don't start arguing with people in Churches, it would be unjustifiably rude (in most cases).


The nature of the universe is an open question, one which is engaging enough, I don't see why we shouldn't find out what others believe or force ourselves to question our assumptions.

First off, Goal is Soul is only for discussing U2's faith and spirituality, not general faith discussions.

As for your second statement, I am open to the idea of discussing miracles and the Bible and such, but you seem to be out to get people who don't believe in the same things you believe. Therefore, I doubt you really mean what you say.

 

[bono_212]

I was close to doing a poll like this.

I would venture to say the people who voted that Christ ascended into Heaven are for Prop 8.

Those that are opposed to Prop 8 voted the other 2 choices or none of the above.

<>

Yep, believing in God and the Bible complete dictates my thought on all subjects

 

[Pearl]

I was close to doing a poll like this.

I would venture to say the people who voted that Christ ascended into Heaven are for Prop 8.

Those that are opposed to Prop 8 voted the other 2 choices or none of the above.

<>

I don't think generalizing and stereotyping other people is a smart move.

 

[LemonMelon]

For what it's worth, I've never had that impression at all. There have been some atheist/agnosticism threads in here in the past, and I've always had the impression that we're a small minority in FYM. Maybe since the forum's going through a lull and things are slower in here now, the numbers have shifted though.

This is a recent observation of mine, honestly. I can't remember what FYM was like before 2007. Perhaps it was different before that. Again, I don't intend this to come across as self pity or resentment...it's just how I've seen things over the past year and a half, or thereabouts.

In any case, the poll results don't look all that convincing as far as A_W's point is concerned: 12-5 in favor of the more polarized options.

 

[VintagePunk]

This is a recent observation of mine, honestly. I can't remember was FYM was like before 2007. Perhaps it was different before that. Again, I don't intend this to come across as self pity or resentment...it's just how I've seen things over the past year and a half, or thereabouts.

In any case, the poll results don't look all that convincing as far as A_W's point is concerned: 12-5 in favor of the more polarized options.

It didn't come across that way at all.

Now that I think of it, for the past year or so, politics have dominated the discussion in here, so I'm probably thinking back more to around 05 or 06.

 

[A_Wanderer]

Affirming that a man/God literally ascended into heaven is more polarising than supposing the story to be an allegory?

The middle option is boorish but the third is more nuanced, I don't doubt the story has importance for many peoples even if they don't think it actually happened.

 

[Pearl]

Affirming that a man/God literally ascended into heaven is more polarising than supposing the story to be an allegory?

If you think those who voted for the former stubbornly believe it, I'd say you are wrong. I may have voted for the literal ascension, but I am open and curious to what others have to say about the allegory.