|
|
|
|
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/13/2007 9:23:56 PM |
My oldest son is 7 years old. We do not have the final results for his IQ test, but he scored at 3 standard deviations above average in matrix reasoning placing him in the 99% percentile of his age group in this element. This is genius for any of you unfamiliar with current psychological standards and testing proceedures.
Current standards - for a child to be considered 'gifted' they must have an IQ of 130 and a superior talent at something. There is no consensus on a definition for 'genius.'
Just thought I'd go ahead and correct you there. | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/13/2007 9:30:13 PM | I find your attitude in your reponse to the writer of the post quite offensive.
1. You have a very skewed view of the bible.
2. The writer of this thread is not being hypocritical. He is offering his opinion on a book.
3. Your statment: "Christians ought to spend less time whining about those who criticism their religion and perhaps actually study and read their own bloodly book."is another offensive statment with little knowledge of what a Christian actually does and reads.
4. It is obvious you have not read the whole damn thing. Otherwise, you would not speaking with such illogical and unfounded comments.
It is ironic how quick you are to judge all Christians, and those that read the bible in such a vile way, but you have not looked at your own deep seated hatred and self-righteousness. | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/13/2007 9:31:42 PM |
Raise your children as you see fit (I do feel sorry for them) and let everyone else raise their kids as they see fit.
Freya, I completely agree with you (except for the feel sorry comment), but I must ask whether your experience as a child and your personal belief that Christianity is self-contradictory (it's not, but that's another thread) makes you agree with those who say that raising a child in the Christian faith, or in any Theistic faith, is immoral, wrong, or abusive? In other words, are you willing to extend to those parents the same rights and respect you want others to extend to you? | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/13/2007 9:57:57 PM | No. I am a firm believer that each person has the right to choose what fits them best. Teach a child about all religions and answer his/her questions and the child will choose what works best for them.
Teach a child only one religion and that child will be forced to accept your word till he or she is old enough to start learning on their own.
Teach a child nothing and that child will have a need to discover religion on their own.
I believe every parent should be willing to teach their child about all religions in an unbiased, positive manner. Let the child decide.
For the record.. my son and daughter have chosen christianity. I support them in their choice, for it is their choice. If they should decide later they need to learn more of other faiths, then I will support them. Just because I find the religion to be contradictory and full of loopholes does not mean others will. | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/13/2007 11:19:39 PM |
It is your right to believe what you will, just as it is your right to smoke or drink, but these industries are forbidden to advertise to target audiences of under-age consumers. It is NOT your right to try to fill our children's minds with hate for God!
I've never heard of this guy, his books, or the movie. But he has every right to write books of this nature. If you don't want these ideas in your childrens' heads, don't let them read the books or watch the movie. | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/14/2007 1:12:57 AM | The only thing bugging me about this movie is the use of the word "daemon." The site pronounces it "demon" when (from what I understand) the pronunciation should be "dai-mon." That's bound to cause some unnecessary confusion and controversy.
 | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/14/2007 5:32:34 AM |
The only thing bugging me about this movie is the use of the word "daemon."
2 usually daemon : an attendant power or spirit : genius
3 usually daemon : a supernatural being of Greek mythology intermediate between gods and men
the only thing evil is how the church demonization of daemon. | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/14/2007 8:28:26 AM |
2 usually daemon : an attendant power or spirit : genius
3 usually daemon : a supernatural being of Greek mythology intermediate between gods and men
the only thing evil is how the church demonization of daemon.
Excellent example of biblical misuse to deceive Kitty! | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/14/2007 8:43:29 AM | | Dear Freya, thank you for your reply. I have to say that you have a maturity of thought that exceeds what I would expect for someone so young. That's a Good Thing. :-) | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/14/2007 8:49:39 AM |
It would be nice to see people think more, but as Nietzsche pointed out, philosophers make their own truths to justify their own actions. This seems to be quite prevalent at the moment.
Philosophy is not making truths to justify actions, unless the philosopher is an extremist. You have jumped on a bandwagon of delusion; a fallacy to better understands your own reasoning my friend. :) | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/14/2007 8:53:05 AM |
the only thing evil is how the church demonization of daemon.
Not really. The word "daemon" and "demon" are interchangeable in the English language. In older usage, "daemon" (pron. "dee-mon", "dy-mon", or "day-mon") meant a subordinate deity, and included those that were mischievous or evil. Over time the good/benevolent subordinate gods became more personal and blended, and the word came to refer almost exclusively to mischievous and evil spirits. Technically, it is correct to use "daemon" but it's rarely sued. Technically either meaning is valid but again it's rarely used. The two different spellings are simply the Greek rendered in English phonetic spelling and the Anglicization of the Greek word. Etymologically, they are the same word. Therefore, the claim that the Church demonized "daemon" with "demon" is false.
In another context they are different. "Daemon" is an old computer tech word for a process that sits in the background waiting for an event before acting. We used to have printer spooler "Daemons" and disk backup "daemons" and so on. I suppose some modern "Trojan" or "virus" might have been called a "daemon" back in the day. | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/14/2007 9:10:34 AM |
Not really. The word "daemon" and "demon" are interchangeable in the English language. In older usage, "daemon" (pron. "dee-mon", "dy-mon", or "day-mon") meant a subordinate deity, and included those that were mischievous or evil. Over time the good/benevolent subordinate gods became more personal and blended, and the word came to refer almost exclusively to mischievous and evil spirits. Technically, it is correct to use "daemon" but it's rarely sued. Technically either meaning is valid but again it's rarely used. The two different spellings are simply the Greek rendered in English phonetic spelling and the Anglicization of the Greek word. Etymologically, they are the same word. Therefore, the claim that the Church demonized "daemon" with "demon" is false
We are not talking about the colloquial definition of daemon, but the dictionary definition. Colloquial definitions are not going to support any of your premises.
Also, I seriously doubt the author was referring to a computer term. We are talking about literary and historical definition of the word daemon vs demon, stop trying to compare apples to octothorpes. | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/14/2007 9:17:19 AM | romanticoptimist:
Daemon obviously comes from Greek religion.
The result, known as the Minoan-Mycenean civilization, flourished in the period from 1600 B.C. to 1400 B.C.
As you can clearly see is predates anything written in the bible.
Lets have a look at its real meaning:
The words daemon, dæmon, are Latinized spellings of the Greek da?µ?? (daimon),[1] used purposely today to distinguish the daemons of Ancient Greek religion, good or malevolent "supernatural beings between mortals and gods, such as inferior divinities and ghosts of dead heroes" (see Plato's Symposium), different from the Judeo-Christian usage demon, a malignant spirit that can seduce, afflict, or possess humans.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daemon_(mythology)
Something you conveniently left out I think. :) | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/14/2007 10:29:21 AM | OK, since I have read the book, I will tell you how a daemon is in the book.
It is not evil. It is not good. It is an extension of the person. Every human in this book has a daemon. Without one, they are pretty much zombies.
For lack of a better term.. their daemon's are their souls that take animal shapes. They cannot get far from their humans because it causes extreme sadness and pain to both the daemon and the human.
Nothing evil there. | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/14/2007 11:08:54 AM | | I think I need to read this book. I still fail to see how this book is promoting anti Christain Hate. | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/14/2007 11:53:08 AM | you said:
2 usually daemon : an attendant power or spirit : genius
3 usually daemon : a supernatural being of Greek mythology intermediate between gods and men
the only thing evil is how the church demonization of daemon.
I may have misled myself in what I suppose you were saying -- you have a tendency towards sloppy writing, so I don't feel too bad about any misinterpretation. What I took that to be was two dictionary definitions (when there are more than these two) without reference followed by a claim, "the only thing evil is how the church demonization of daemon."
I then followed up with an expanded definition of the word, its etymology, and an explanation of how the word "Daemon" became the more common "demon", but also showed where "daemon" can be used in modern times albeit with a different meaning that the word that became "demon". That was just a bit of fun trivia. No claim was made that the author meant it in that sense. In fact, nothing I said referenced the author's use. It was about your mischaracterisation and false claim. But I think you knew that. Either way, I stand by my rebuttal of your claim. HAND
Not really. The word "daemon" and "demon" are interchangeable in the English language. In older usage, "daemon" (pron. "dee-mon", "dy-mon", or "day-mon") meant a subordinate deity, and included those that were mischievous or evil. Over time the good/benevolent subordinate gods became more personal and blended, and the word came to refer almost exclusively to mischievous and evil spirits. Technically, it is correct to use "daemon" but it's rarely sued. Technically either meaning is valid but again it's rarely used. The two different spellings are simply the Greek rendered in English phonetic spelling and the Anglicization of the Greek word. Etymologically, they are the same word. Therefore, the claim that the Church demonized "daemon" with "demon" is false. | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/14/2007 11:59:24 AM |
romanticoptimist: Daemon obviously comes from Greek religion.
Did I say it didn't? In fact I said
the two different spellings are simply the Greek rendered in English phonetic spelling and the Anglicization of the Greek word. Etymologically, they are the same word. That "two" refers to the two words, one of which is "daemon". As for whether it precedes the Bible or not, I don't care. I wasn't making any claim in that regard. Please read what I actually said.
Something you conveniently left out I think. :)
Whatever. That smoky smell in your nostrils is your Straw Man burning.
Oh, yeah.... :-) | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/14/2007 12:15:41 PM | ...Aaaand, it's that time, again! Feral gets into it. Yay. Right?
I have posted a few times here, and the first thing I learned was to phrase my viewpoint without drawing fire. I'm sorry. I can't help it this time. It is unfortunate, but passionate positions nearly always draw passionate responses, yes?
I was not only disgusted with what I learned about this movie, but also deeply sadened. Personal reaction, perfectly justifiable.
I can't describe how hurt I am that a hate-promoting author has made it into the mainstream media with a deliberate attempt to remove God from the minds of our children. Gotta admit, I don't see cause to feel personal hurt based on unknown people's actions, but that's just me. The whole "remove God from the minds of children" thing strikes me as a touch paranoid-reactionary, though. Find me a human with the capacity to scoop a concept out of someone's psyche, and then I'll be scared.
This movie is based on the first book of a children's trilogy called His Dark Materials by Phillip Pullman. Now, we get to the interesting part, yes? The movie is based on the first book, but the identification of the antagonist as synonymous with the Jewish God occurs in the last book. So, effectively, the movie doesn't necessarily say this? I have to admit I have neither read the books nor seen anything significant on the movie, so I won't judge, but that does seem a touch discrepant. Moving on, the impression I get from the whole discussion so far (as regards YHWH in the story being an impostor deity usurping the creator's position and all), is that it all sounds a bit like the Gnostic concept of the demiurge, Ialdabaoth, the "God" of the world, who takes the place of the true God and misleads humanity into worshiping him instead of the real Creator. Someone tell me if I got that confused or not.
Phillip Pullman stated he wants to kill God in the minds of children. ...The mainstream speculation is that he intends for the movie to promote the books, thereby giving the children the uninhibited story when they read them. Again, I haven't seen any concrete indications that Pullman's intent is to "poison young minds against God", but it seems the consensus is that he's a Humanist, so I doubt he'd lose sleep if that were the effect. Meantime, authors do tend to take it as a happy when their stories gain wider recognition through movies, prompting higher sales of their books. Go figure, eh?
CHILDREN CANNOT THINK FOR THEMSELVES! They become what we make them by careful molding of their delicate personalities. So, yeah, I read this, then got to all the "discussion" of the viewpoint. As well as the rest, but I'm going to get to that. As for this, I tend to look into such things, and it's been my experience that the old Dr. Money, "a child's mind is a blank slate" thing is a little bit off. I'll grant that nurture has its place, but I also see human children as possessing discrete souls and identities. Call me kooky, okay? Upshot is that I disagree. I'd get passionate about it, but "a soft answer turneth away wrath."
See, the impression I get from humans is that folks tend to react to or integrate new sensory impressions (knowledge, concepts, ideas, what-have-you) with regard to what they've already got stacked up in their mental storehouses. Kind of a compare and contrast gig where they tend to go with what makes the most sense to them in the end, right?
Now, I'm sure we can all agree that a parent's or adult's input is gonna have a pretty strong bearing on this, but that's because of that whole storehouse deal. A kid'll go with what he/she's been taught, so long as it don't conflict with direct experience. Fair enough.
Way it works, then, is parents raise their kids to believe whatever they themselves accept as true. For those of us who believe in the absolute truth of a given viewpoint, religious or otherwise, we'll naturally try to instill that in our offspring. It's the way it's done, dig? For parents to busy with their own stuff to act as sounding boards and decent guides for their kids, they'll most likely get that disappointment of seeing their children take the "wrong" path. Crappy sitch, but it happens.
It is NOT your right to try to fill our children's minds with hate for God! Skipped a bit, I know, but this seems to be the salient issue, yeah? Not to mention, the one most folks are jumping on as being hypocritical, with reference to certain aspects of religious history. Not my place to confirm or deny, but I will give my take: First off, I find it interesting that I haven't heard anything about an outcry from the "Jewish community" regarding what essentially amounts to blasphemy. It does appear to be taking place "among the Gentiles", though, so that could be the point, there. Dunno.
It also makes sense that there would be an outcry on behalf of some or many Christians, what with the fact that they claim the same God. (Again, the whole Gnostic thing jumps up in my mind and piques a bit of curiosity, but that's neither here nor there.) Striking thing to me, then, is that folks are arguing both the character of Christianity's nature and how it applies to a particular view of child psychology. Intriguing, one might say.
Here's the scoop, though, about the (perceived) "truth" involved, as seen by an interested "outsider". Yes, kids assimilate stuff from their environment, but the vast majority of influence comes with the old saw, "children learn what they live". If they're "indoctrinated" with Christianity (or any other religion) by parents who truly believe the truth of that religion, the kids will see no reason to question it until or unless given cause to do so.
To get to the rest of it, Judaism is exclusive by its nature. You're either one of the people or not, plain and simple. Christianity, a la Christ Himself, opened that up to the rest of the world, the "outsider" Gentiles. Since then, everybody's got the chance to go to the Jewish God and say hi. Dice, right? Yeah, except there's still the whole inside/outside dichotomy, only now it's a matter of believing/having faith in the "right" things, rather than being born or marrying into the family of God's Chosen People.
Sounds critical, I know, but these are the facts regarding the understanding most folks seem to have about all this. If I've got that wrong, call me on it. It's all good. Point is, believing it as truth and teaching it to one's kids as truth are not in conflict. Essentially, it is "religious indoctrination", but it's also a matter of sharing the "truth" with those you love. Matter of perspective, there.
Way it all breaks down, especially in our pluralistic society, is that having one message out there ("There is no God but Iehovah, and Jesus is His Son", to paraphrase -- badly), doesn't mean any of the other messages can't be, as well. Raise your kids your way; they're your kids. Teach 'em right from wrong as you see them, with whatever foundational doctrine you believe is appropriate. Do that, and do it "right" according to your creed, and you won't have to worry what'll happen if they come across something that diverges or contradicts, right? They'll know what's "true" and act accordingly.
Fun part -- from my perspective, at least -- is teaching kids according to what's "right" and seeing them appreciate that stuff, rather than doing so by constantly trying to "shield" them from what's "wrong".
"If you ever want something done, either do it yourself, or forbid your children to do it." --Wise words.
Oh, yeah. As for the etymology of words used with regard to the conversation, that's fascinating stuff, but I'm wondering how it applies to Pullman's intent, or if it really enhances or adds to the progression of the thread. | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/14/2007 12:25:36 PM |
As for whether it precedes the Bible or not, I don't care. I wasn't making any claim in that regard. Please read what I actually said.
Maybe the fact that you don't care is because I pointed out the premise?
It clearly has a bearing on the whole point to my reckoning, that being it was adopted/adapted for biblical use...
Ha! There really is nothing new under the sun! Lol! | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/14/2007 12:28:10 PM |
romanticoptimist: Daemon obviously comes from Greek religion.
Did I say it didn't? In fact I said
the two different spellings are simply the Greek rendered in English phonetic spelling and the Anglicization of the Greek word. Etymologically, they are the same word.
That "two" refers to the two words, one of which is "daemon". As for whether it precedes the Bible or not, I don't care. I wasn't making any claim in that regard. Please read what I actually said.
Something you conveniently left out I think. :)
Whatever. That smoky smell in your nostrils is your Straw Man burning.
Oh, yeah.... :-)
And how IS this book anti-christian. When I love is how when i book is pro-christian, EVERYONE has to go out and read it or watch the movie. but when it uses a term like witch, or anything else the mentions or sounds close to another religion bible thumpers come out of the holes or churches to announce how fill in the blank is the downfall of this wonderful American empire, and how it promotes worship.
Meanwhile, after they work themselves into a frenzy, the media jumps on board, and after the book or movie gets free publicity the hoopla dies down. After words the bible beaters go back looking for the devil else where. What amuses me most is that only 1 out of 1,000 have actually read the book and not just a few ambiguous comments the author made when tried to build the plot. | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/14/2007 1:43:27 PM |
A president cannot even take office unless he is 25 years of age or older,
well that just blows this concept out of the water!
The man in office right now could be outsmarted by an orangutan
Shows that age and wisdom do not always go hand in hand | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/14/2007 1:48:12 PM | Let me try to say this again. Perhaps I am speaking in Pali and no one understands what I am saying.
First. The book is FICTION. It is not real. It will never be real. It comes from the imagination of one man and was written to entertain. To try to put paranoid ideas behind the reason of the book is just plain foolish.
Second. I cannot believe I am discussing this again, however, here we go. The first book takes place in another universe. This means it is not in this universe. How can anyone be so pig-headed and egotistical as to believe that IF other universes existed, all of them would worship the christian god?? Are some of you christians so desperate to have something to blame and b!tch about that you will refuse to listen to common sense and look at something the way it was meant to be viewed?? In the universe that the first book is written in, there is no god and Jesus was just a great prophet. I believe this was stated in another post! How hard is this to understand?
Third. It is not the death of god they are trying to accomplish. But rather, the death of an imposter that has set himself up as god. I would suggest reading the books for yourself, each one of you, before jumping on the hate bandwagon. It really does make those who have no understanding of the books look like ignorant morons. | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/14/2007 2:04:56 PM | | Article 2 section 1 of The constitution sets the minimum age limit for the President of the United States as 35 years of age | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/14/2007 3:20:43 PM |
I said: As for whether it precedes the Bible or not, I don't care. I wasn't making any claim in that regard. Please read what I actually said.
you said: Maybe the fact that you don't care is because I pointed out the premise?
Nope. It's because I don't care. I wasn't making any point you were so busily trying to disprove.
MrBad_Kitty ,in a confusing moment, said: And how IS this book anti-christian.
Seeing as you're quoting me, I'll have to assume you're asking me. My answer? I don't know. But I do know that I've never claimed it is anti-Christian. Read back and see what I have said in regards to the book. Thank you. | |
|
| Golden Compass Promotes Hate
Posted: 11/14/2007 3:28:15 PM |
Seeing as you're quoting me, I'll have to assume you're asking me. My answer? I don't know. But I do know that I've never claimed it is anti-Christian. Read back and see what I have said in regards to the book. Thank you.
you are hung up on the word daemon, that's what i got from your posts.
BTW< have you ever read the books? | |
|
|
| Page 3 of 11
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 |
|
Home
login 
