quote:Originally posted by Jeff Albertson: I have a friend who doesn't like Sabrina the Teen-Age Witch because of a perception that the character is promotes Wicca, but she enjoys Lord of the Rings.
.
Me, I stopped buying Archie Comics before Sabrina was created. But, from what I have seen, I get the impression it is generally on the same level as the rest of the Archie humor stuff, just a comic-book sit-com with the "sit" being the injection of magic, similar to Bewitched or I Dream of Jeannie, which were popular around the time that the Archie folks came up with the Sabrina idea.
LotR is a Christian allegory. Tolkien was one of the inklings. He denied the allegory claims, but, c'mon. "The Return of the King"? "The King is coming back soon"? Gandalf the Grey "dies," and is resurrected as "Gandalf the White"? Pu-lease. Could it be more obvious?
quote:He called it "res cogitans," and by it seems to have meant both the operations of the rational intelligence and of the "spirit" (in which, as you note, D. seems to have believed).
As for your argument about using the primary meaning of "spiritual," I don't see the relevance unless Pat says that that's the one he meant. Has he said so?
Unlike what you and Pat are saying he meant in his post, Descartes actually believed that the thinking substance was of the literally spiritual realm. That's why he was a dualist. The soul wasn't a metaphor for him.
What is the metaphorical meaning of 'spirit'? I don't hear it applied to the law, for example, despite it's nonphysicality. Or culture, or logic, or many other nonphysical entities. The only thing I ever hear it applied to is human psychological factors that once were thought to be part of the soul (as with Cartesian thinking). That is, it's a religious analogy or equation. Thus, it's not a synonym, metaphorical or otherwise, for 'nonphsyical.' I'd like to see anyone make sense of Pat's post, taking all religious aspects out of how he used 'spiritual,' while still relating it to his point against Porta. For example, Porta said he agree spiritual themes were necessary for good stories, but no one corrected him that he didn't actually agree, since Pat didn't mean literal spirituality. So, what is necessary for good stories according to Pat? What was he talking about when he used the word 'spirituality'? I expected to have a bit of a debate over whether the spiritual was necessary for good stories, not argue over whether a Christian saying other believers found spirituality in the films they watched in a church-related event was meant to be taken as a mere metaphor for purely secular themes. I guess there's no point in arguing further, I evidently agree with Pat that they found nothing literally spiritual in the films they watched and that spirituality isn't necessary for a good story. The end.
-------------------- The Gospel, wherein much Truth is written. Posts: 6949 | From: us of fuckin' a | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Porta, Tolkien said that it wasn't merely a Christian allegory, involving, as it most certainly did, many religious myths, not just Christianity. Resurrection is hardly original to Christianity.
-------------------- The Gospel, wherein much Truth is written. Posts: 6949 | From: us of fuckin' a | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Perhaps because he thought Porta's definition of the spiritual was too narrow, applying only to those who considered themselves bonafide Christians who have nothing to learn about the human spirit from anything but Christian writings. That's the sense that I get from Pat's post; not (as you seem to be rebutting from the start) the idea that Christians can re-interpret everything non-religious into something religious. Pat may or may not think that, but he didn't write that.
You are interpreting me correctly. Yes, I am a Christian (although I suspect by Porta's definitions, I don't qualify), but the kind of Christian who recognizes spirituality in many forms. As the rector of my previous parish once put it, "Who am I to say that you cannot behold Jesus Christ in the Buddha's smile?"
-------------------- Best, Pat Posts: 3023 | From: PA, USA | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pat, I was told you meant nothing religious by the word 'spirituality.' Buddha is still religious. What did you mean was necessary for good stories when you used the term? Please remember you didn't mean anything religious by the term.
quote:but the kind of Christian who recognizes spirituality in many forms.
Is this the metaphorical use again, or the literal?
-------------------- The Gospel, wherein much Truth is written. Posts: 6949 | From: us of fuckin' a | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
When you define 'spiritual' by connecting it to the 'human condition,' (the ultimate cliche in criticism), you are not really saying anything meaningful; this is as vague as it gets . . . Every story with people (or 'super-people') in it is about the 'human condition' or 'the human spirit' . . . .
Posts: 373 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
I recognize spirituality (or, if you prefer, "a connection to the non-material") in the reaction to a beautiful sunset, the ability to appreciate the message of music without understanding a word of the language it is sung in (or even if it has no words at all), and the fact that all great human civilizations share certain myths and legends and story types (the human mono-myth, if you will).
Ken:
No, I don't agree. Many stories are just about getting from point A to point B to point C in a plot. The characters in them tell us nothing about the condition of being human, they exist merely to serve a writer's need for exposition. Much as I enjoy them, for example, most James Bond movies fall into this category.
-------------------- Best, Pat Posts: 3023 | From: PA, USA | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
No, I don't agree. Many stories are just about getting from point A to point B to point C in a plot. The characters in them tell us nothing about the condition of being human, they exist merely to serve a writer's need for exposition. Much as I enjoy them, for example, most James Bond movies fall into this category. [/qb]
Pat,
Don't these movies have something to tell us about desire, control, power, sex, etc . . .? I think they do. And all of these issues have to do with being human. I don't know that Bond movies are that thoughtful about these issues, but they deal with them.
"Many stories are just about getting from point A to point B to point C in a plot. The characters in them tell us nothing about the condition of being human, they exist merely to serve a writer's need for exposition."
Why does the character want/need/desire to get to B and/or C? Why is she at A and not somewhere else? - These are spiritual questions in the generic sense in which you use the term.
Posts: 373 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Pat ONeill: I am a Christian (although I suspect by Porta's definitions, I don't qualify), but the kind of Christian who recognizes spirituality in many forms.
.
True spirituality can exist only in a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. Pagan "spirituality" is a false spirituality. The infidel knows not God.
quote:Who am I to say that you cannot behold Jesus Christ in the Buddha's smile?
.
That doesn't even make any sense. Who am I to say that the blind are blind?
quote:Why does the character want/need/desire to get to B and/or C? Why is she at A and not somewhere else? - These are spiritual questions in the generic sense in which you use the term.
No--they're just pragmatic questions for the author to answer in order to further the plot. At least, that's the case if, as is the case in the kind of story I'm describing, the characters only exist to further the plot, as opposed to the plot deriving from the characters.
-------------------- Best, Pat Posts: 3023 | From: PA, USA | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
So, there is no true Jewish spirituality, either? What a narrow view of humanity you have, what a crippled vision of God's love you espouse.
The point of the "Who am I to say..." question is that the nature of God and God's plan for mankind is beyond human understanding. We get glimpses of it, at best, and none of us is capable of saying that the glimpses in the Bible are any better than the glimpses in the Bhagavad Gita or any other religion's great works.
If you do insist that they are, then--again--you are restricting God to what YOU can conceive...and I cannot imagine a greater blasphemy than to restrict God to human conception.
-------------------- Best, Pat Posts: 3023 | From: PA, USA | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Pat ONeill: the nature of God and God's plan for mankind is beyond human understanding. We get glimpses of it, at best, and none of us is capable of saying that the glimpses in the Bible are any better than the glimpses in the Bhagavad Gita or any other religion's great works.
.
You know that as a surety, eh?
quote:If you do insist that they are, then--again--you are restricting God to what YOU can conceive.
.
No, I GET my concepotion of God FROM God via the message he gives about Himself.
quote:Originally posted by Pat ONeill: [QUOTE]As the rector of my previous parish once put it, "Who am I to say that you cannot behold Jesus Christ in the Buddha's smile?"
Pat, I have almost never agreed with any statement you have had to make about comics, but brother PREACH IT! Your rector is obviously a wise man and a good Christian and that quote goes in my mind forever.
"Conservative Christians" of today are not really Christians, in my view. A Christian is someone who attempts to pattern his life after the teachings of Jesus Christ. The problem is, "Conservative Christians" seem to overlook the covenant Jesus left us with:
"The old covenant is done away with. This is the new covenant: Love thy neighbor as thyself and love the Lord thy God above all others."
Today's "Conservative Christians" are only interested in "loving" people who think and act exactly as they do. They forget that Christ ministered not to the "saved" but to the "lost". The whores, the dirty, the downtrodden, the publicans, all of those people who were outside the norms of society at that time was who he was the kindest, most loving, and most accepting of. That seems to get missed by "Conservative Christians".
The title "Conservative Christian" is, in itself, an oxymoron. Christ was extremely liberal in his actions and what he advised people to do. He lived in a communal group with the disciples, as did the early Christians. (Kinda like the hippies in the 60's. Real conservative group there.) Christ advocated the sharing of resources with those who didn't have anything. (Kinda like the socialists. Another real conservative group.) "Conservative Christians" take a narrow definition of scripture, only tend to look at those scriptures that bolster their own opinion, and then conveniently ignore everything else.
Posts: 142 | From: Chattanooga, TN | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
...I GET my concepotion of God FROM God via the message he gives about Himself.
Where do you get your conception of God from? Where is this message He gives about Himself? Do you just mean the Bible?
Posts: 1010 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by nickw122869: "Conservative Christians" of today are not really Christians, in my view.
.
So by your own words you set yourSELF ("in MY view") up as judge of who has or has not the faith.
quote:"Conservative Christians" are only interested in "loving" people who think and act exactly as they do.
.
You lie like a dog.
quote:Christ was extremely liberal in his actions and what he advised people to do.
.
Is THIS the Jesus you mean?
quote:These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: "Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans."
.
Or maybe THIS?
quote:Jesus withdrew to the region of Tyre and Sidon. A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, "Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is suffering terribly from demon-possession."
Jesus did not answer a word.
So his disciples came to him and urged him, "Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us."
He answered, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel."
The woman came and knelt before him. "Lord, help me!" she said.
He replied, "It is not right to take the children's bread and toss it to their dogs."
.
Right. Very liberal guy.
quote:"Conservative Christians" take a narrow definition of scripture, only tend to look at those scriptures that bolster their own opinion, and then conveniently ignore everything else.
.
As opposed to "make it up as they go" Christians, who don't even KNOW the Bible?
posted
quote: "Conservative Christians" are only interested in "loving" people who think and act exactly as they do. .
You lie like a dog."
So then you must love me also, right god boy? Do you love me?
-------------------- Words fail the system people only know words as a cover up tool in order to describe things. -Cory Fuka Posts: 2095 | From: redford,mi,usa | Registered: Feb 1999
| IP: Logged |
No, Porta, the whole point is that I know nothing as a surety, especially about the nature of God. I am incapable of knowing it in that way, just as all humans are. If it was possible for God to be knowable as a "surety," then the very idea of God as a divine, immortal being, the same forever and ever, would be a lie.
-------------------- Best, Pat Posts: 3023 | From: PA, USA | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
CR said: "What is the metaphorical meaning of 'spirit'? I don't hear it applied to the law, for example, despite it's nonphysicality."
I googled "spirit of the law" and gave up counting how many pages came up. The majority of these appear to reference religious concepts of law but there are a number that use the phrase colloquially, just as Pat did:
posted
"quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Conservative Christians" are only interested in "loving" people who think and act exactly as they do. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
You lie like a dog."
But I thought your whole argument, Porta, was that it was right for modern Christians to discriminate against peoples perceived as being outside the sheepfold, because they hadn't/wouldn't accept the truth of Jesus, and because Jesus himself did so (""I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.")
"John (10:14) I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine.
(15) As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep.
(16) And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd."
Why is "one fold and one shepherd" different from "conservative Christians...loving people who think and act exactly as they do?"
Posts: 5910 | From: Houston, TX | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Why does the character want/need/desire to get to B and/or C? Why is she at A and not somewhere else? - These are spiritual questions in the generic sense in which you use the term.
No--they're just pragmatic questions for the author to answer in order to further the plot. At least, that's the case if, as is the case in the kind of story I'm describing, the characters only exist to further the plot, as opposed to the plot deriving from the characters.
I don't get how anyone could characterize questions of 'why people do they things they do, why they desire things' as pragmatic questions. If all stories were about the best way to get to Scranton from here, maybe . . .
I also can't imagine how such an approach to thinking about narratives and how they deal with human nature is going to make for interesing criticism and interpretations.
Posts: 373 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Gene, could you at least try to connect thoughts from one post up with another?
quote:I googled "spirit of the law" and gave up counting how many pages came up. The majority of these appear to reference religious concepts of law but there are a number that use the phrase colloquially, just as Pat did:
Right, so when Pat said "this audience of Christian adults [...] found points of spiritual discussion [...] in I, Robot, A Man for All Seasons, and West Side Story," he meant they found the spirit of the age, spirit of wine, spirit of Kafka and the spirit of the law. And by "[a]ny GOOD story has [spiritual themes] in it" he meant they have to reference such things. Not only that, but he evidently recognizes the spirit of the law in a sunset:
quote:I recognize spirituality (or, if you prefer, "a connection to the non-material") in the reaction to a beautiful sunset, the ability to appreciate the message of music without understanding a word of the language it is sung in (or even if it has no words at all), and the fact that all great human civilizations share certain myths and legends and story types (the human mono-myth, if you will).
Sure, Gene, that makes perfect sense.
Anyway, spirit can mean 'general intent' or 'essence'. Not sure how that's a metaphor for the law (as in 'spirit is the law') or Kafka ('spirit is Kafka'), though. But maybe you're suggesting the synonyms of 'general intent' or 'essence' is what Pat thinks is necessary for good stories, or maybe you just don't remember what we're arguing about.
To summarize my point, spiritualism is a vague concept that, by its vagueness, is widely inclusive. Because of this inclusivity, it's used by those more liberal religious types as a way of connecting their own religious tradition with those of others. As this thread aptly demonstrates (e.g., "spiritual" metaphorically refers to the "human spirit"), the problem is that the term is so vague that those using it have no idea what they're actually saying when they use it. Rather than bringing people together (an admirable goal), its continued usage just keeps people from understanding each other, and is, therefore, not a good thing.
Googling "sophistic spirit" returned 56,300 hits.
-------------------- The Gospel, wherein much Truth is written. Posts: 6949 | From: us of fuckin' a | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Unlike what you and Pat are saying he meant in his post, Descartes actually believed that the thinking substance was of the literally spiritual realm. That's why he was a dualist. The soul wasn't a metaphor for him."
Where did I say the soul was a metaphor to Descartes? I said he combined in "res cogitans" both elements that one might label "metaphysical" today (such as a soul proper) and those that even a diehard materialist would not consider to be metaphysical (rational mentation). They remain allied in his mind not because he was religious but because his philosophy categorized all these non-physical elements under one heading. This idea of associating such elements seemed (and seems) to be giving you problems, so I suggested that you check out Descartes to refresh your understanding of how non-religious elements might be included under the heading "spiritual." I shoulda known better, of course.
Posts: 5910 | From: Houston, TX | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Right, so when Pat said "this audience of Christian adults [...] found points of spiritual discussion [...] in I, Robot, A Man for All Seasons, and West Side Story," he meant they found the spirit of the age, spirit of wine, spirit of Kafka and the spirit of the law. And by "[a]ny GOOD story has [spiritual themes] in it" he meant they have to reference such things. Not only that, but he evidently recognizes the spirit of the law in a sunset"
"Spirit of the law" responds to *your* notion that such a formation is somehow logically impossible. As it doesn't appear in Pat's post, I'm not bound to prove that it's in his post. As you say, duh.
"Anyway, spirit can mean 'general intent' or 'essence'."
I wouldn't have a problem with this as I think it's pretty much suggested by Pat's choice of examples. But I would have hesitated to introduce a term like "essence" myself as I would have thought it would have proved too metaphysical a term for *you.*
"Not sure how that's a metaphor for the law (as in 'spirit is the law') or Kafka ('spirit is Kafka'), though."
"Of," not "is." The correct construction would be "The spirit of Kafka is..." and then one would presume to distill down whatever one thinks is unique about Kafka. I assume that Pat and his church-buds performed some similar operation when they discussed I ROBOT, though of course I don't know, not having witnessed it.
"To summarize my point, spiritualism is a vague concept that, by its vagueness, is widely inclusive."
It's not any vaguer than "essence," though I'm not sure if you were recommending that or not. If not, do you have a substitute term that you think is less inclusive, and that works in the same situation? Oh, and that also promotes all this understanding that you desire.
And I still think that when most people hear the word "spiritualism," they're going to think of mediums and table-tapping.
Posts: 5910 | From: Houston, TX | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Why does the character want/need/desire to get to B and/or C? Why is she at A and not somewhere else? - These are spiritual questions in the generic sense in which you use the term.
No--they're just pragmatic questions for the author to answer in order to further the plot. At least, that's the case if, as is the case in the kind of story I'm describing, the characters only exist to further the plot, as opposed to the plot deriving from the characters.
Whoa, whoa, hold on, now you are saying that approach effects the "spiritual" or human content. Sorry can't agree it's just different approaches that have different emphasis from the start as either inner or outer struggles as a matter of form not theme. example Lawrence creates an insecure cripple inside and out in Lady Chatterley's as an answer to a pragmatic question of a plot.
Let's just stick to idea of spirit watered down to mean anything human or even biological. Often we hear of the Human spirit in the struggle to survive, for example, a crash or misfortune - what is that? Seems quite a bit of materialism turned about to me. Nothing really profound about anything wanting to survive, to live. Trapped animals chew off limbs...nothing spiritual about that I assure you.
-------------------- "The folly of mistaking a paradox for a discovery, a metaphor for a proof, a torrent of verbiage for a spring of capital truths, and oneself for an oracle, is inborn in us." (Paul Valery) Posts: 3478 | From: Brooklyn, NY | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Pat ONeill: Porta, all humans are incapable of knowing the nature of God as a surety.
.
You know that statement to be true, eh? With certainty?
quote:If it was possible for God to be knowable as a "surety," then the very idea of God as a divine, immortal being, the same forever and ever, would be a lie.
.
You know that statement to be true, eh? With certainty?
posted
I was curious why David Porta, here and in other threads, insists so feverishly that his brand of Christianity is the only ethical way to live ... and anyone who believes in other things is evil or stupid and will burn in the fiery pits of Hell ... especially non-Christians, whom he sees as the enemies of all that is good in the world.
I know a lot of spiritual people, but David Porta is on a merciless and humorless crusade.
Turns out that Pagan blood flows through the Porta family veins.
No joke! David's sister, a talented East Coast sculptor and artist by the name of Siena Porta, is a proud and practicing Zen Buddhist.
Among the places Siena talks about her Buddhist faith and its influence on her art is a Web site for an art gallery showing her work on Bleeker Street in lower Manhattan (David, um, do you know what kind of artist types gather around Bleeker Street?).
Sister Siena writes that her "installations represented have roots deep in my Zen practice, which has shaped my artwork for decades. The titles often refer to koans, both well-known and personal; paradoxical riddles that clarify."
Zen Buddhism ... say, didn't that start in 6th century China? Not a Christian faith or a white man's religion or based on the superior Western civilization David Porta touts so much.
I imagine David Porta staring at his talented, intellectual, cosmopolitan sister over the table at Thanksgiving dinner ... seething ... thinking about her lost soul burning in Hell for eternity and maybe damning his whole family, too ... and the level of passion he brings to his arguments on Comicon suddenly makes sense.
Pagan blood flows through the Porta family veins.
Who would have thought?
Posts: 5959 | From: Lexington, Ky. | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
what in the gods names is pagan blood? Is there some such thing as a pagan race?
-------------------- "The folly of mistaking a paradox for a discovery, a metaphor for a proof, a torrent of verbiage for a spring of capital truths, and oneself for an oracle, is inborn in us." (Paul Valery) Posts: 3478 | From: Brooklyn, NY | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
By one common definition, pagans are religious folks who are not Christians, Jews or Muslims. Christians sometimes are more general and say that any non-Christian religious person must be a pagan or a heathen.
Or as David Porta would say about Buddhists ...
quote:Originally posted by David Porta: No, I GET my concepotion of God FROM God via the message he gives about Himself.
