The most ANNOYING misconception about YOUR faith?

[BFD_Zayl]

Sorry, friend, but I must say I had many of those misconception about you. Its nothing you've done or said, its just the word "necromancer". As an avid D&D player and fantasy book reader, I can safely say that "necromancy" is never portrayed in a positive way. I tend to take things at face value. You should have seen how confused I was when I found out that Satanists don't believe in Satan.
So I'm curious, what does a real world necromancer actually do?

Well its hard to explain, but one way of putting it is the use of death magicks, which is almost like witchcraft, but, instead of using the life energies(as most witches/wiccans/pagans do, not all) we use the energies of death, coined the "death essence". it has a few nasty side effects but we have ways to counter that, albeit i find them rather distasteful...we conjure the spirits of the deceased for council,advice, and if the spirit is disturbed, to put it back to rest. Necromancers strike a balance between life/death, light/dark, good/evil and so on. and the pinnacle of any Necromancers skill is the "lich form" which is when the necromancer goes into a trance, and his body begins shutting down, essentially the necromancer is dead with only the very very basic body functions going at minimal strength. just enough to keep us alive. while in the lich state we can travel the netherworld as if we are a denizen of that realm. Now granted many of our rituals and symbols seem morbid and evil but they are not, this is such a common misconception that it does not even annoy me anymore. i just write an explanation like the one i just gave you, any further questions do not hesitate to ask.

 

[Real Sorceror]

Thanks for the explianation, Zayl. I suppose it would get really old having to explian yourself over and over again.
I'd already guessed that necromancers might be able to speak with the dead. I'd also guessed that you would have to channel negative energy. I didn't know about traveling to the afterlife, though. Thats pretty neat (though probably not very safe).

 

[BFD_Zayl]

Thanks for the explianation, Zayl. I suppose it would get really old having to explian yourself over and over again.
I'd already guessed that necromancers might be able to speak with the dead. I'd also guessed that you would have to channel negative energy. I didn't know about traveling to the afterlife, though. Thats pretty neat (though probably not very safe).

yeah it does get tiring, but its necessary, and yes it can be dangerous, so much so that sometimes the necromancer might lose himself in the void, or just up and die.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

That Gnosticism originated as a warped version of orthodox Christianity.

That's a minor anachronistic supposition.

What started out formless became a warped version of Christianity. At least that's what I think Koester said.

 

[Booko]

Hahaha, yes. You don't come across Islamic pride here (we never contributed much of anything, except the neck tie... lol), but in the Arab and even more so in the Persian world, I've noticed they are exceptionally proud of all of their historical inventions, and so on. I think its important to least know you're dealing with the birth place of civilization when you're there - especially in Iraq.

Oh, and I forgot to mention what I told my old beau when I handed him those books: Now remember, these people were civilized when your ancestors were still smearing themselves with deer grease and woad.

 

[c0da]

That Buddhists worship the Buddha, and that Buddha was some sort of supernatural being.

Another assumption a few people have made when asking me about Buddhism is that the Dalai Lama is head of the whole Buddhist religion.

Also, One friend of mine also seems adamant that the fact that I am a Buddhist means I cannot have any political views that are even slightly conservative.

 

[Djamila]

Oh, and I forgot to mention what I told my old beau when I handed him those books: Now remember, these people were civilized when your ancestors were still smearing themselves with deer grease and woad.

We say the same thing here. Our Balkan countries were so far ahead of the rest of Europe for so long. Greece is, of course, the most noted example but also in the rest of the Balkans we were doing so much better.

We always say "We were eating with golden forks when the French when the Europeans were still swinging from trees"

 

[Katzpur]

Let's see, misconceptions about UU....

I'm probably guilty of believing some of these things. Since I really don't want to be misinformed, would you mind helping me out? I'm going to just ask you some questions about a few of the statements you made and maybe your answers will help clarify thing for me.

That we're not a real religion.

How would you define "religion" and what elements must be present to qualify an organization as a "religion"?

That we can believe anything we want.

Aside from a belief that goes in opposition to one of the basic tenets of Unitarianism I've seen posted several times (but can't seem to find now, no matter how hard I look )what would be an belief that Unitarians would find unacceptable?

That we practice/believe in all religions.

This seems to be technically impossible since there are, within each religion's set of doctrines, certain doctrines that are mutually exclusive. But would you say that it would be an accurate statement to say that you do encourage an unusually wide variety of beliefs to all be presented as equally valid?

That we are completely secular and political and devoid of real spirituality.

I'm sure you're not devoid of real spirituality, but I do imagine Unitarian worship services to resemble what's dicpicted in the old "How many Unitarians does it take to change a light bulb?"

We choose not to make a statement either in favor of or against the need for a light bulb. However, if in your own journey you have found that light bulbs work for you, you are invited to write a poem or compose a modern dance about your light bulb for the next Sunday service, in which we will explore a number of light bulb traditions, including incandescent, fluorescent, 3-way, long-life and tinted, all of which are equally valid paths to illuminescence.

Obviously I recognize this little piece as a joke and there is, of course, an LDS equivalent joke. But these humorous depictions of various denominations do generally have their basis in fact, even though they are obviously exaggerated. There is a Unitarian Church close to me. I guess I ought to just attend a service and see for myself, huh? (I just hate going alone!)

That we are Christian denomination (we once were but are not any longer).

I don't have that misconception, although I did before coming to RF.

That all UUs are political liberals and must be.

Well, that's probably about as accurate a statement as "All Mormons are political conservatives and must be." Well, I know that most Mormons are political conservativesby choice. Would the statement "Most UUs are political liberals by choice," be accurate?

I'm sure there's more... I had a thread about this in the UU forum, I think I'll pull it up again.

And I probably should have checked it out before asking these questions, but I didn't really notice this statement until I finished typing. Anyway, I'm going to assume that you (Maize and other UUs on RF) will realize that just because I am uninformed about your religion, I am not at all antagonistic towards it, and my comments here are in no way intended to be derogatory. They may very well be classified as "stupid," but that's all.

 

[Booko]

Obviously I recognize this little piece as a joke and there is, of course, an LDS equivalent joke.

re: light bulb jokes

There has to be a thread for Comparative Religions in there somewhere. [/quote]

 

[Katzpur]

This part especially gave me a chuckle...

..."endless celestial sex to create these new little critters."

Good grief. Please tell me people don't actually believe this kind of stuff.

I wish I could tell you it's not. Here (complete with the grammatical errors) is an actual quote from a very typical anti-Mormon website:

-Once becoming gods and goddesses, they are required to populate their own planets. Good mormon women/girl's desires to become goddesses and be "eternally pregnant". To be able to look down on the planet and see all the offspring and say, "That's mine. I populated it." Endless celestial sex. This is not talked about openly by mormons...it's "embarrassing" to talk about.

Give me ten minutes and I could come up with a dozen more equally bizarre statements. And yes, people do believe this stuff is accurate.

 

[dawny0826]

I wish I could tell you it's not. Here is an actual quote from a very typical anti-Mormon website:

-Once becoming gods and goddesses, they are required to populate their own planets. Good mormon women/girl's desires to become goddesses and be "eternally pregnant". To be able to look down on the planet and see all the offspring and say, "That's mine. I populated it." Endless celestial sex. This is not talked about openly by mormons...it's "embarrassing" to talk about.

Give me ten minutes and I could come up with a dozen more equally bizarre statements. And yes, people do believe this stuff is accurate.

It's unfortunate. And I'm sure it gets tiresome to hear after a while.

 

[Ody]

don't forget jews created capitalism too
that i am...how did someone on this forum put it...

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?p=340490#post340490

ah yes...."trouble maker in the world"

http://www.golivewire.com/forums/peer-351613-support-0.html

http://www.golivewire.com/forums/peer-340118-support-0.html

:cover:

 

[Katzpur]

It's unfortunate. And I'm sure it gets tiresome to hear after a while.

Yes, it does, and it's probably in anticipation of this kind of rhetoric that I sometimes over-react when someone posts a link to an anti-Mormon website. I need to learn to be more like Deep Shadow, and not get out the boxing gloves quite so quickly. I just think I see a wad of mud heading my way and I respond before I realize that it's just a minor dust storm. I'm not trying to make excuses for my behavior. I'm just trying to explain why I react the way I do.

 

[MaddLlama]

Oh yeah, and the only reason to be an athiest is because you really just don't like rules.

And that foxhole nonsense.

That always drove me nuts.

Really it just goes back to one basic concept that makes my head explode: "It is impossible to be moral without believing in god (and specifically, my god)".

 

[dawny0826]

Yes, it does, and it's probably in anticipation of this kind of rhetoric that I sometimes over-react when someone posts a link to an anti-Mormon website. I need to learn to be more like Deep Shadow, and not get out the boxing gloves quite so quickly. I just think I see a wad of mud heading my way and I respond before I realize that it's just a minor dust storm. I'm not trying to make excuses for my behavior. I'm just trying to explain why I react the way I do.

It can't be easy to be on the receiving end of mud slinging and no doubt Mormons often are. Try not to be so hard on yourself. :hug:

 

[Katzpur]

You know, this really is an interesting thread. A lot of minor misunderstandings are being corrected here. This one is a great example:

That Buddhists worship the Buddha, and that Buddha was some sort of supernatural being.

I haven't believed this for years, but as a child and as a teenager, I did. I'll tell you why. When I was very young (seven years old, as I recall), I saw the Rogers and Hammerstein movie, "The King and I." There was numerous references in it to Buddha, and the King of Siam was always praying to Buddha, asking him for blessings and thanking him for favors. When you're a kid, stuff like that makes an impression on you and it sticks. It wasn't until I was much older that I realized that Buddha wasn't just an Asian proper name for the Christian God. Hey, at least I eventually figured it out.

 

[Green Gaia]

OK, I'm dealing with some major sleep deprivation, but I'm afraid if I don't answer these now, I'll forget to do so tomorrow. So here goes... (I'm going to cheat and use some pre-printed answers for some of these, so if you think you're read it before you probably have)

I'm probably guilty of believing some of these things. Since I really
don't want to be misinformed, would you mind helping me out? I'm going to just ask you some questions about a few of the statements you made and maybe your answers will help clarify thing for me.

Sure!

How would you define "religion" and what elements must be present to qualify an organization as a "religion"?

In dealing with beliefs and theology, it's important to note that Unitarian Universalism is a way of being religious rather than a religious doctrine. For us, religion is an ongoing search for meaning, purpose, value and spiritual depth in one's life. We believe that individuals are entitled to make their own search, and that not all persons (not even all UUs) are going to share the same beliefs.

Aside from a belief that goes in opposition to one of the basic tenets of Unitarianism I've seen posted several times (but can't seem to find now, no matter how hard I look )what would be an belief that Unitarians would find unacceptable?

I'm guessing you're referring to our 7 Principles which are:

We, the member congregations of the Unitarian Universalist Association, covenant to affirm and promote

• The inherent worth and dignity of every person;
• Justice, equity and compassion in human relations;
• Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations;
• A free and responsible search for truth and meaning;
• The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large;
• The goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all;
• Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.

I'm going to bring in something Davidium said about this:

We, the member congregations.... the principles are not binding on individuals, though most UU's have taken them to heart. But, for the individual, the right to disagree is written even into the principles....

The right of conscience

The principles are only binding on congregations, not on individuals. If a congregation were to, say, call for and end to democracy in America, they would be removed from the Association.

For the individual, the line is drawn as to whether or not you are a UU by whether or not you abide by the covenant you are in with your local UU Congregaion (or the Church of the Larger Fellowship, if there is no UU Church near you). No individual can be a member of the UUA, only congregations. Individuals are members of independent churches. The full name of our denomination is the "Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations". We are a free association of independent and interdependent churches.
​

OK, now that I've made it even more confusing to a non-UU, let me attempt to answer your question. It's actually quite simple, and for that another RF UU has already spoken on this so I will quote her,

We UUs cannot believe anything that denigrates or harms other people. We can't believe anything racist, or classist, or sexist, or hetero-sexist, ageist, ableist, etc. UUs are free to believe what our consciences demand us to believe, and nothing less than that. - Lilithu
​

This seems to be technically impossible since there are, within each religion's set of doctrines, certain doctrines that are mutually exclusive. But would you say that it would be an accurate statement to say that you do encourage an unusually wide variety of beliefs to all be presented as equally valid?

I'm sensing that your idea of what is equally valid may be different than mine. However, individual freedom of belief is one of our basic principles. We encourage individuals to explore the mysteries of this life and why are we here in a way that is fulfilling and even challenging for them.

This thought is not finished, and iIm finding it difficult to not get into UU Theology, which I am not up for at the moment. (hoping Lilithu will come in and save me by finishing the thought!)

I'm sure you're not devoid of real spirituality, but I do imagine Unitarian worship services to resemble what's dicpicted in the old "How many Unitarians does it take to change a light bulb?"

We choose not to make a statement either in favor of or against the need for a light bulb. However, if in your own journey you have found that light bulbs work for you, you are invited to write a poem or compose a modern dance about your light bulb for the next Sunday service, in which we will explore a number of light bulb traditions, including incandescent, fluorescent, 3-way, long-life and tinted, all of which are equally valid paths to illuminescence.

Obviously I recognize this little piece as a joke and there is, of course, an LDS equivalent joke. But these humorous depictions of various denominations do generally have their basis in fact, even though they are obviously exaggerated. There is a Unitarian Church close to me. I guess I ought to just attend a service and see for myself, huh? (I just hate going alone!)

Let me tell you a secret about UUs. We love visitors and we love to talk! But I do understand the not wanting to go alone.

There is some truth in the lightbulb joke, of course or it wouldn't be funny. I'm but not sure it as accurate in regards to Sunday services as it may be in other areas. The minister does not describe everything 10 different ways to satisfy everyone. That would be silly and waste time. However, I find the lightbulb joke very accurate it describing our stance on individual freedom of belief (which I think I mentioned above) and encouragement in expressing and sharing their belief and wisdom. We believe in the community and sharing ourselves with it.

Well, that's probably about as accurate a statement as "All Mormons are political conservatives and must be." Well, I know that most Mormons are political conservativesby choice. Would the statement "Most UUs are political liberals by choice," be accurate?

It is probably mostly accurate, although I don't really know for sure across all UUs. In my experience, I would say yes, you are correct.

And I probably should have checked it out before asking these questions, but I didn't really notice this statement until I finished typing. Anyway, I'm going to assume that you (Maize and other UUs on RF) will realize that just because I am uninformed about your religion, I am not at all antagonistic towards it, and my comments here are in no way intended to be derogatory.

Of course not, I think I know you better than that and they were not stupid either. Thank you for asking and I hope I made a little sense.

 

[kiwimac]

* That we are Fire-Worshippers.

* That we are a dying religion

* That you have to born a Zoroastrian (only true in ONE culture's defn of Zoroastrianism)

* Mithraism and Zoroastrianism are the same.

* Zoroastrianism is di-theistic

 

[Djamila]

* That we are Fire-Worshippers.

* That we are a dying religion

* That you have to born a Zoroastrian (only true in ONE culture's defn of Zoroastrianism)

* Mithraism and Zoroastrianism are the same.

* Zoroastrianism is di-theistic

That you all want to carpet bomb Shiraz, Isfahan, and Tehran and make Yadz the capital of Iran.

 

[kiwimac]

Nope, One I have heard is that we want to take Iran and Iraq back over and "forge a new persian empire." obviously someone was taking something OTHER than perscription drugs THAT day.