The Passion rotten so far

[Ned]

James Caviezel said that twice during filming of the flogging scene the Roman soldiers missed (the thick board across his back) and actually hit him with the flails. He said that both times he had his wind knocked out and he could not to cry out in pain. He said that the second time the flails cause a 14 in. gash.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by Ned
James Caviezel said that twice during filming of the flogging scene the Roman soldiers missed (the thick board across his back) and actually hit him with the flails. He said that both times he had his wind knocked out and he could not to cry out in pain. He said that the second time the flails cause a 14 in. gash.

Your point? Occupational Health and Safety was lax on the set?

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Molly:

1. What is the philosophical grounds for the atheist to do as he would be done by?

2. Go argue with Boris as to whether Atheists must reject Christianity. He seems to think so. I speak of Christianity, because that is my bias. So boo hoo. If I were a Jew I would talk about attitudes to Judaism.

3. As for he who is without sin, refers precisely to the issue of spiritual judgment, and not legal judgment. They condemn the woman, whild commiting the same sins themselves.

4.
Still evades my point. I admit that not all Christians live their life as they ought to. But at least we call for Christians to love their enemies. I do not see any such desire from Atheists beyond the requirements of social necessity and 'tolerance'.

' "....the sin of unbelief is greater than any sin that occurs in the perversion of morals." '

Thomas Aquinas.

Yes, there's a whole lot of love there.

What is the philosophical basis for religionistas to love atheists? Did they make a moral choice, or has the choice been made for them? Why you assume that because you have a belief that your moral philiosophy comes from supernatural being, that it is necessarily better than mine, is part and parcel of the arrogance of religionistas.

What on earth do you think tolerance is about, if not love=respect for fellow human beings?

I respect your right to believe in any number of impossible things, but I still maintain that you labour under a delusion- I would not be true to my own principles if I did not do so.

You make the standard incorrect assumption that because atheism is not 'for religion' then it is necessarily 'against religion'.

Are you for Kali, or Muhammad, or Ahura Mazda? Or are you against them?

Are you for Tarot cards and Wicca or against them?

There is no standard philosophical blueprint for those who do not believe in superstition or religion, or astrology, or anything similar- no codex, no Bible or Qu'ran. There is however a whole stream of philosophical thought predating Christianity and Islam and reaching into modern times, that stresses that the responsibility for our actions lies with us- there is no get out clause for me, I can't say 'god made me do it' or 'it was divinely ordained'.

Not believing in religion on its own does not imply anything about a person's moral code. Most atheists subscribe to a great many of the same moral strictures as religionistas, but from an entirely different base. We can see morality as something created by humanity, according to the way that most humans or societies feel the way the world should operate, rather than seeing it as an arbitrary set of rules handed down by a glowing vapour, or a voice from a cloud.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
The violence in this case is historical, and I think needs to be done in order to fully realize Jesus' ordeal and the consequence of our sin.

This touches on one of the reasons the film is so nasty. Gibson's follows a very conservative strand of catholicism which amongst other things claims Jesus suffered more in his death than any other human has ever suffered or ever will. It was the supreme sacrafice. That is why the movie is so graphic - to support that claim.

I remember this kind of thing being taught from the pulpit. I always found it hard to believe and a misunderstanding of those events.

So in other words the violence is NOT historical. It's hyped up to score a theological point. Interesting how so many non catholics are buying it because it's actually a key ultra catholic proposition.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Ned
Boris, perhaps I am reacting to the obvious hatred of religion exhibited by many atheists.

So you react with bigoted generalizations about people who are also, in some cases, reacting to obvious hatred of atheists exhibited by religionists? Brilliant logic in your realm, really.

This doctrine does not condemn atheists to be slaughtered or the equivalent if they do not convert. It does not condemn atheists as being idiots, morons or the like for not believing in God because it recognizes that belief is God requires faith.

Christian doctrine says all atheists go to hell, Ned. Islam does the same. How is this remotely comparable to things expressed by atheists? And atheists aren't out there slaughtering people who do not convert either, so big deal!

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Surprise, surprise.

No, shouldn't be a surprise. When you claim atheists all belittle believers, you're practicing bigotry, plain and simple. I've never, ever belittled someone for being a believer, and neither has any atheist I've known.

Yes, but how do Atheists treat those who obey the so-called superstitions? With respect or with scorn? I would say the latter far more than the former.

And I'd say you're wrong and making just another bigoted generalization. Athiests spend their lives working and interacting with religious people, and even marry them and share families with them. They don't go around belittling people for their beliefs. The problem seems to be that you think someone disagreeing with your dogma is belittling you. No, they're disagreeing with you. I've seen you belittling atheists here enough to know you're a hypocrite in this regard.

No, because we are taught to love those who differ from ourselves in our beliefs. I do not see any such justification for similar respect from atheists. It seems optional, rather than obligatory.

Yeah, here's the typical "atheism is immoral!" argument. And it's crap. Atheist morality comes from the body social, among other places, and in our society (generally) it is believed you should respect people of different beliefs. And most atheists do just that. You seem to be thinking that atheism is a moral philosophy, which it isn't. Being an atheist doesn't mean one doesn't have any moral philosophy, it just means one doesn't get it from a supernatural deity, one gets it from rational thought and social values.

Your own word traps you. Tolerance means that you respect a belief to which you disagree.

Wrong, Ben. It means you respect the people with whom you disagree. I doubt you respect the belief that abortion is fine in any circumstances, but I hope you tolerate people holding that belief...don't you?

I contrast this to the attitude of atheists, who feel so enlightened, as to never have to work from the perspective of the theist. We are never accorded such luxury, in being shown the enormity of our own sins every day.

Right, atheists never put themselves in other people's shoes or try to see things from their perspectives, no. This is getting old. Is there any insult you won't throw at atheists?

This is again a crock of BS, because atheism isn't a moral philosophy, unlike religions. Atheists don't look to it for morality, they look to other moral philosophies, be they secular humanism, Buddhism, etc. You're missing your mark entirely.

Finally, Christians, are not called to merely tolerate their enemies, but to love their enemies, to do good to them, rather than ignoring them.

And again, you're comparing apples and oranges. Atheism != a moral philosophy, it is merely a statement of belief about a supernatural deity.

Not the question. Does atheism explictly promote the love of a Christian?

See above. Any more jousting with windmills you care to do? We can deal with these silly fallacies all night long.

[Alexander's Horse]

Typical. I explain the reason for the graphic violence and noone picks up on it

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


I would argue you've now crossed into religious bigotry a la Ned.

The ideal for an Atheist is to reject all forms of superstition, period. Christianity doesn't get singled out, so we can cut the martyr complex here.

And "belittle believers?" Please. So does your rejection of all other creeds but Christianity mean you're belittling them? Are Jews required to belittle all faiths but their own?

Not that I am perfect, and 100% consistent either, but two wrongs do not make a right (both sides justifying belittling the other because the other does it too).

And your right -- some atheists do not belittle just Christians -- they express their ignorant disrespect for all religious people.

Just as there are some religious people who express ignorant disrespect for atheists.

And the merry-go-round continues to go round, and round . . . . .

[Boris Godunov]

MrFun, and you miss the point again-- Most atheists don't belittle anybody for their beliefs, period. I believe the same to be true of most religious folks, although this thread is starting to make me concerned.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
So you react with bigoted generalizations about people who are also, in some cases, reacting to obvious hatred of atheists exhibited by religionists? Brilliant logic in your realm, really.

I am reacting to the hateful statements of (some) atheists. Athiests of category 2, those who simply do not believe in God but who do not deny that God exist, are inherently respectful of others views. The people who decry Christians or others who do believe in God as idiots, morons or whatever are the problem.

My antogonism to their bigotry is not itself bigotry even though you say it is. Intolerance of others legitimate beliefs is the problem.

Christian doctrine says all atheists go to hell, Ned. Islam does the same. How is this remotely comparable to things expressed by atheists? And atheists aren't out there slaughtering people who do not convert either, so big deal!

I am not sure that a doctrine that says that one must be baptized in order to gain access to heaven is a doctrine that condemns the unbaptized to hell. There is another place between the two reserved for the unbaptized.

[Ben Kenobi]

AH:

Jesus suffered more in his death than any other human has ever suffered or ever will. It was the supreme sacrafice. That is why the movie is so graphic - to support that claim.

If that's the case, the suffering need not be physical. In bearing our sins, he would suffer the consequences of them all.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
Typical. I explain the reason for the graphic violence and noone picks up on it

AH, I read your post with interest. I am not sure though that Catholic doctrine says that Christ suffered more than any other human.

He surely suffered horribly, though.

What happened in the movie is an accurate despiction of the teachings of the Catholic Church.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Ned
My antogonism to their bigotry is not itself bigotry even though you say it is. Intolerance of others legitimate beliefs is the problem.

It IS bigotry, Ned, because you're claiming ALL atheists from categoy 1--those who believe God does not exist--are taking these intolerant, bigoted actions. And that is categorically not true.

I am not sure that a doctrine that says that one must be baptized in order to gain access to heaven is a doctrine that condemns the unbaptized to hell. There is another place between the two reserved for the unbaptized.

I'll let BK argue with you on that one, but this is clearly outside mainstream religious thought. And I've been baptized--does this mean I'm granted access to this heaven I don't believe in by default?

[Ned]

Boris, I may have made overbroad statements heretofore. To the extent that I did, I withdraw them.

However, look at the signature statement of Che below and judge for yourself about Che.

[Ben Kenobi]

Boris:

When you claim atheists all belittle believers, you're practicing bigotry, plain and simple. I've never, ever belittled someone for being a believer, and neither has any atheist I've known.

No, some are rather nice. What I am instead claiming that the ideal atheist would belittle Christians.

Lacking evidence to the contrary, I need some kind of affirmation of love for Christians, beyond the tolerance you express.

I've seen you belittling atheists here enough to know you're a hypocrite in this regard.

Yet I do not charge you specifically, and you do not hesitate to call me hypocrite. Go ahead, show me your proof of me belittling Atheists.

Atheist morality comes from the body social, among other places, and in our society (generally) it is believed you should respect people of different beliefs.

So if we lived in an intolerant society, we ought to be intolerant? Cultural relativism is poor sand for a foundation.

You seem to be thinking that atheism is a moral philosophy, which it isn't. Being an atheist doesn't mean one doesn't have any moral philosophy, it just means one doesn't get it from a supernatural deity, one gets it from rational thought and social values.

The last part of your statement contradicts the former. If atheism is a moral philosophy, it will say that one can only resort to reason and social values to define morality. If it is not, there will be no need to make such a statement.

So which is it? Is Atheism a moral philosophy, or is it not? If not, it cannot make the statement I request confirming love towards Christians in particular, and religious folks in general. You confirm my precise statement that it is an optional value, and not obligatory.

It makes little sense to compare Atheism to Christianity, for the same claims to truth cannot be met by Atheism, as can be confirmed by Christianity.

I doubt you respect the belief that abortion is fine in any circumstances, but I hope you tolerate people holding that belief...don't you?

Yes, I do. That does not prevent me from speaking the truth. Many argue that I am not respecting them by showing them the truth of abortion.