• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What Keeps You Coming Back to RF?

Truthseeker

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
Trailblazer said:
That sounds really good. About half of the upstairs, which is the only part of the house that I use, is tile and the other half is carpet. When we first moved here the cats messed up the carpet so it is a lost cause, and I have it covered with carpet runners and throws I bought at Goodwill. I doubt it could ever be cleaned, even professionally.
Click to expand...
I suppose you could replace the carpets downstairs, but since you are never downstairs, there would be no hurry, of course.
 
Truthseeker

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
Trailblazer said:
The thing is, I am a Baha'i because I believe in God and Baha'u'llah, but that is about the extent of it. Religion is not a normal thing for me, and since I was not raised in any religion it has always felt foreign to me. I do not attend Baha'i activities such as Feasts, study groups, book clubs, or devotionals, and I do not engage in religious practices although I do say Baha'i prayers at times.

So for me religion is abnormal, a thing other people do that I don't understand.
Click to expand...
That is a fascinating post in which I learned a lot about how you tick.
 
Trailblazer

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Truthseeker said:
I suppose you could replace the carpets downstairs, but since you are never downstairs, there would be no hurry, of course.
Click to expand...
Part of the downstairs is the family room where the cats don't go, except when they get past the gate and sneak down there, and then I have to chase them back upstairs. That carpet is newer and in good shape. The rest of the downstairs is two bedrooms, a bathroom and a hallway. That is all carpeted except the bathroom and that carpet was trashed by the male cats who used to live down there. I put new carpet on top of the carpet in one bedroom. Someday, if I ever decide to use that area I can replace all the carpet.
 
vulcanlogician

vulcanlogician

Well-Known Member
It Aint Necessarily So said:
What's the lesson in that flood myth, or the tower of Babel myth, or the story of Job?
Click to expand...

Allegory doesn't just simplify simple things. It also simplifies complex things.

As in, things that are difficult for us humans to fathom. Whether one considers them valid or not, the Upanishads and the Gita make interesting attempts at interpreting and making sense of enormous human realities. Other religious works too.

For example, the Book of Job. I was brought up with the traditional interpretation of the work. I always thought it was dumb. But when I read it myself (some time in my 30s) I walked away from it amazed and inspired.

For me, it was not just a work about dutiful faith. It was also a work that condemns making assumptions about God. In a weird way, it comes close to being a Biblical endorsement of agnosticism. Or at the very least, in my personal analysis, a refutation of the doctrine of Biblical inerrancy.

Someone believing in God doesn't bug me so much.

But people who think they have everything figured out because a holy book discloses God's intentions to them... that irks me to no end.

You'll find arguments in Job that believers ought not possess such attitudes. If you read Job carefully, anyway.

It'd be funny indeed if my interpretation of Job is accurate. Because then the Bible itself would contain criticisms about the doctrine of inerrancy. What would an inerrantist say to that?

But, of course, I'm not one to say that my interpretation of Job is the "one true correct" interpretation. But I did glean some criticism of some central doctrines when I read it. And that's interesting.

***

Thanks for the compliment in your last reply. Likewise, I find your posts to be interesting and perceptive. I certainly dig your take on things.
 
Last edited:
Trailblazer

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
vulcanlogician said:
Allegory doesn't just simplify simple things. It also simplifies complex things.

As in, things that are difficult for us humans to fathom. Whether one considers them valid or not, the Upanishads and the Gita make interesting attempts at interpreting and making sense of enormous human realities. Other religious works too.

For example, the Book of Job. I was brought up with the traditional interpretation of the work. I always thought it was dumb. But when I read it myself (some time in my 30s) I walked away from it amazed and inspired.

For me, it was not just a work about dutiful faith. It was also a work that condemns making assumptions about God. In a weird way, it comes close to being a Biblical endorsement of agnosticism. Or at the very least, in my personal analysis, a refutation of the doctrine of Biblical inerrancy.

Someone believing in God doesn't bug me so much. But people who think they have everything figured out because their holy book discloses God's intentions to them... that irks me to no end. You'll find arguments in Job that believers ought not possess such attitudes. If you read Job carefully, anyway.

It'd be funny indeed if my interpretation of Job is accurate. Because then the Bible itself would contain criticisms about the doctrine of inerrancy.

But, of course, I'm not one to say that my interpretation of Job is the "one true correct" interpretation. But I did glean some criticism of some central doctrines when I read it. And that's interesting.

***

Thanks for the compliment in your last reply. Likewise, I find your posts to be interesting and perceptive. I certainly dig your take on things.
Click to expand...
People like you is one reason I keep me coming back to RF.... I learn so much, and there is so much we can learn.
People who think they have all the answers, be they believers or atheists, irk me to no end.
 
It Aint Necessarily So

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
vulcanlogician said:
For example, the Book of Job. I was brought up with the traditional interpretation of the work. I always thought it was dumb. But when I read it myself (some time in my 30s) I walked away from it amazed and inspired.
Click to expand...

And I find no value there.

vulcanlogician said:
For me, it was not just a work about dutiful faith. It was also a work that condemns making assumptions about God. In a weird way, it comes close to being a Biblical endorsement of agnosticism. Or at the very least, in my personal analysis, a refutation of the doctrine of Biblical inerrancy.
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm just different. Others praise these stories, and I am mystified about why. I still don't find value there. I arrived at the same conclusions, but based in reason and experience, not a story. And when I write my thoughts on them, it's never in poems or parables.

Furthermore, I prefer plain speaking to riddles. If the story of Job had any meaning to its authors, it's apparently lost to us today. If only they had written in clearer language, we'd know why they thought this story worth preserving.

I'm thinking that these stories function as verbal Rorschach tests. When the book of Job was being explained to me by believers on another site, three different believers told me what it meant to them. One said that the point of the story is to be a person of integrity and faith no matter the circumstance in life, and no matter what well-meaning but judgmental friends tell you. Another said that Job was being tested the way a soldier would be to make him a better man - some kind of training. A third said that Job was being punished because he was only behaving well to force God's blessings rather than for the sake of goodness itself, for which reason God allowed, and even convinced Satan to take away his blessings. I'm sure that these answers say more about them than the story itself.
 
vulcanlogician

vulcanlogician

Well-Known Member
Trailblazer said:
People who think they have all the answers, be they believers or atheists, irk me to no end.
Click to expand...

I tend to hear something valuable being said when a hardcore atheist speaks. But yeah. Not all atheists have a good method for approaching arguments.

I wouldn't say it "irks" me when an atheist has a "know all" attitude, but I certainly agree that some atheists make assumptions that aren't completely justified.

The thing with atheists, though, is you can often make an appeal to logic with them. And 99% of the time, atheists want to say things that are logically sound.

With (some) religious folks, logical appeals can simply be dismissed out of hand. And that leaves no options for honest discussion. And that's where the "irk" enters the picture for me.

I should also add that I always appreciate it when an atheist or believer agrees to appeal to logic in any discussion. I'll take a logical theist over an illogical atheist any day.
 
vulcanlogician

vulcanlogician

Well-Known Member
It Aint Necessarily So said:
And I find no value there.
Click to expand...

To be fair, you REALLY have to squint your eyes hard to see value in the Bible most of the time. But I'd argue that Job is an exception to that rule. In either case, I hear where you're coming from. If someone sees little value in Job, I get it.


It Aint Necessarily So said:
Furthermore, I prefer plain speaking to riddles.
Click to expand...

"Life, and all that lives, is conceived in the mist and not in the crystal. And who knows but a crystal is mist in decay?"
--Kahlil Gibran

I'm not saying that riddles are preferable to clear prose, but (as poetry demonstrates) sometimes you gotta be unclear in order to clearly convey something.

One example that springs to mind as a VERY helpful allegory is Plato's ship of state (from the Republic). I don't wanna go into it (because I'll ramble) but if you aren't already familiar maybe look it up. I think it's a good example where allegory easily says something straight prose struggles with.

Or if you're more poetically inclined, check out Walt Whitman's "A Hand Mirror." It's a very brief poem and can be found free online.

I think that poem says something true (and hits you right in the gut with what it says). But normal prose could only feebly attempt to encapsulate what it says. ie. the allegory is more accurate than an analytically rigorous rendering of it.

If you're in the mood I think either of those are good counterpoints to the idea that allegory is superfluous or unnecessary in relation to true things. I'd argue that allegory is perhaps even NEEDED sometimes. If you're an avid poetry reader you probably don't even need to consult my examples. You already know that poetry conveys things that prose cannot (or struggles to convey). Isn't that a good justification for exposing ourselves to allegory?

The problem with religion isn't that it contains allegory. That's one of the best things it has going for it. What I see as FAR MORE problematic about religion is that many folks take the allegories to be literal statements. That's simply dangerous and foolhardy.

But, ultimately, in my opinion, allegory is quite valuable.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top