I think it's rather pointless myself, but really, who cares? If kids want to go about in these dumb little relationships that go nowhere than let them do so. I mean, I think discouraging it would only lead to problems. The thing being is that if we discourage such activity there can easily become a problem of unopeness and rebellion. While technically pointless, I think it serves some benefit in that it gives people experience with the sort of thing. While some can argue that an introvert can have a much more stable relationship, I'd argue that it's different for those sort of people because the necessities to provide a good relationship is different. If you consider that through these activities at an early age, these sort of extroverts will have more experience with how they handle their relationships and what makes them happy.
Goeniko's forum posts
I act like Quagmire.
Basically the same thing as anyone else - an enjoyable game. I don't see how the Wii's requirement for good games is any different from any other console.
Oh wow. 13 more games. Big deal. Especially whereas PS3 games are generally rated higher anyway.
[QUOTE="Goeniko"] Actually... http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/2001/06/What-Liberal-Protestants-Believe.aspx Crushmaster
...Liberal protestants are not Biblical Christians. What exactly do you mean by "biblical Christians?" Any Christian can be considered "biblical" by the fact that their beliefs are made through what they interpret from the bible. To top this, that wasn't my original point. My point is that the Protestants took in both liberal and conservative Christian views.
Actually... http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/2001/06/What-Liberal-Protestants-Believe.aspx[QUOTE="Goeniko"][QUOTE="blackregiment"]
Sorry Biblical Christians do not believe in reincarnation.
blackregiment
There you go again Biblical Christianity and liberal Christianity are not the same. That is what I have been trying to tell you. I am a Biblical Christian, not a liberal Christian.
Where did I say that Liberal and Conservative Christianity is the same? My point was that the Protestant's had views from both sides of beliefs.[QUOTE="Goeniko"]That's definitely true. But my point is that due to the fact that people still have faith in Christianity, you can't call it a myth and have it supported by everyone. When it comes to those mythologies, people simply don't believe in them anymore so calling them myths is considered proper. You have to remember that there are people who believe that the bible is a historic proof, so the term myth wouldn't apply to it in their eyes. A myth needs to be believed as untrue for it to be considered a myth by everyone, but for Christianity's that just isn't the case.joao_22990Oh yes, that is also definitely true, and this problem plagues many other discussions, with words such as theory or chaos have different meaning depending on their context. However, that is why i search for exactitude and try to define my points to great measure. And if everyone did that, then we'd all be fine. I suppose. Also, this does not help that i live in a social environment that is largely agnostic, and where religion is something to be argued only as a last resort. Where I live, I find there's a fair mixture of beliefs. So that kind of makes for numerous influences. I personally grew up with my atheist father{I never spent much time with my mother} so I had the large logic influence put on me. I think the biggest factor today that attributes to out beliefs is generally hereditary, and due to this hereditary people aren't willing to give up their beliefs as easily despite the fact that there still are people who still go outside of that norm despite the influence.
Yeah, but protestantism still has both conservative and liberal views in it. If you recall, they have liberal beliefs in reincarnation and the origin and such. You can still label protestantism to be liberal.[QUOTE="Goeniko"][QUOTE="blackregiment"]
So sorry to disagree but a study of Church history will show that those responsible for the Protestant reformation were not liberal Christians, they were Biblical Christians. Have you ever hear of sola Scripture and sola fide? The backbone of the Protestant reformation was conformity to the Word of God, not the man-made traditions of the Catholic Church. Read about Luther, Wycliffe, and Tyndale and you will understand what I meant.
blackregiment
Sorry Biblical Christians do not believe in reincarnation.
Actually... http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/2001/06/What-Liberal-Protestants-Believe.aspxWell then, we both understand that this is all a problem because of the many definitions of "myth". However, my interpretation of myths has been the same since i remember ever learning about them.[QUOTE="Goeniko"] Within the same article: "The term "myth" is often used colloquially to refer to a false story" "Many scholars in other academic fields use the term "myth" in somewhat different ways" "In a very broad sense, the term can refer to any traditional story." In that sense, it's really a sense of how you want to define it. However, you can't really define as a myth because myth often pertains to many as untrue, and because of that you can't really call religion a myth beyond your own views of it. Myth is an ambiguous term, and not everyone accepts it as a definition for religion. joao_22990
I mean, who's to say Zeus won't smite me with his powerful thunder if i say something bad? Or that Odin will deny my death in the Ragnarök and judge me to eternal suffering? Same with every religion, so i just separated "myth" from "being certainly a lie".
That's definitely true. But my point is that due to the fact that people still have faith in Christianity, you can't call it a myth and have it supported by everyone. When it comes to those mythologies, people simply don't believe in them anymore so calling them myths is considered proper. You have to remember that there are people who believe that the bible is a historic proof, so the term myth wouldn't apply to it in their eyes. A myth needs to be believed as untrue for it to be considered a myth by everyone, but for Christianity's that just isn't the case.I already said this but, wikipedia to the rescue:[QUOTE="Goeniko"] The problem with this is: YOU CAN'T PROVE IT. Myths is a factor of belief. You can consider religion to be a myth, but by proper definition it isn't. Unless you can prove to all the Christians in the world that their beliefs are a myth, then the beliefs won't be considered as such.joao_22990
In the field of folkloristics, a myth is conventionally defined as a sacred narrative explaining how the world and humankind came to be in their present form.wikipediaThis is what i meant, that myth does not only mean that it is a lie. It also means all the sacred understanding of our reality that each religion has.
I'm not saying that understanding in false, but it is a myth, in that is normally based on stories and texts that each religion considers sacred. So, in this way every religion has it's myths, so it is subject to be studied by it's mythology.
Within the same article: "The term "myth" is often used colloquially to refer to a false story" "Many scholars in other academic fields use the term "myth" in somewhat different ways" "In a very broad sense, the term can refer to any traditional story." In that sense, it's really a sense of how you want to define it. However, you can't really define as a myth because myth often pertains to many as untrue, and because of that you can't really call religion a myth beyond your own views of it. Myth is an ambiguous term, and not everyone accepts it as a definition for religion.
Log in to comment