The Campaign Builder's Guild

Quote from: JharvissTo Stargate525, I think humanity is a perfectly reasonable thing to invest my faith in.  Humans astound me every single day, much more so than God does.  The goodness in people is overwhelming, the sacrifice people are willing to make.  I'm very partial toward human beings and I think that humans are God.

Amen to that.  This is my stance as well; my only worry is that people will take this idea, mystify it, and claim that we are God in a very different, very troublesome sense.  Nevertheless, I hold to it, and I hope that one day we might all come to feel the same way. (I know we won't, but that's beside the point.)

I'm kind of a "lost" Christian, as I'm not really sure where I'm going and kind of believe the potential and reasonability of a lot of different subdivisions. I find it disheartening to see that the religion has so many bad branches that are so corrupt. While I do believe in God, I'm hesitant to believe that Christianity is the right way. I am mostly willing to accept the fact that another religion could be the "right" way, if there is one at all (as much as I hate to be wrong). In my opinion it's good to know when you are right, but if you can't accept the fact that you are hardly always right and might be wrong regarding the most influential parts of your life, then there's a problem. I don't however believe that this opinion makes me agnostic.

Basically, if I were to throw my religious beliefs to the wind and see where they ended up, I think it'd come to Christian Humanism.

Quote from: WitchHuntI'm kind of a "lost" Christian, as I'm not really sure where I'm going and kind of believe the potential and reasonability of a lot of different subdivisions. I find it disheartening to see that the religion has so many bad branches that are so corrupt. While I do believe in God, I'm hesitant to believe that Christianity is the right way. I am mostly willing to accept the fact that another religion could be the "right" way, if there is one at all (as much as I hate to be wrong). In my opinion it's good to know when you are right, but if you can't accept the fact that you are hardly always right and might be wrong regarding the most influential parts of your life, then there's a problem. I don't however believe that this opinion makes me agnostic.

Basically, if I were to throw my religious beliefs to the wind and see where they ended up, I think it'd come to Christian Humanism.

Hmm, I had never heard of Christian Humanism before. Reading up on it, I think that's what I might be...

@ PenguinDragon's idea:

I do not believe an Atheist Church based on the tenets of science would work. Let me restate that: people might follow it (many people even, perhaps) but it could never be logically consistant. For it is the basis of science itself that it can never provide definitive truth. For any give scientific theory, there is a 99% chance that it will eventually be replaced by one that suits the empirical data better (at least, according to the scientists of that day). Science admits, and in fact is based on the fact that it will never achieve perfection: a definitive truth about the nature of life and reality will never come from science.

While one can follow science as a provider of day-to-day truths, illuminating some basic causalities, science provides no answers to the questions of life that are perhaps the most pressing ones, and almost certainly the most fundamental ones. For this we must turn to religious, philosophical or pseudo-scientifical systems that all ultimately rest on belief, such as (some form of) Christianity, Humanism, or what have you.

Something entirely different:

Quote from: Salacious Angelthose of ethnic persuasion

:wtf:

Túrin

It's a sarcastic remark.  There's not a sane person on this planet who ain't 'white' who appreciates being called "ethnic", myself included, at least insofar as it is stressed in the nonsensical dichotomy of white/ethnic.  For those of you who think it's acceptable, I advise you consider otherwise.  (I think it'd be better conveyed if I added inverted commas.)

As pertaining to your comments about an atheist church, that's what I was actually about to post, myself.  Even if science could be stated with absolute certainty as fact, the scientific universe is inherently devoid of meaning (which I attribute entirely to humanity).  Besides which, an Atheist Church would inevitably succumb to dogma (one of my favourite things about Warhammer 40K), and eventually be mystified, thus becoming an oxymoron.

Nonsensical indeed. The word "ethnic" doesn't even have a meaning the way you used it. You can't be "of ethnic persuasion", you only have ethnic origins ("you" as in "everyone"). My ethnic origins, for example, are Dutch (fully, as far as I'm aware). Ethnic stems from Greek "ethnos" which means "people". Your ethnic origins (not sure if that is the correct term) would be your line of ancestry. I have no idea what "ethnic persuasion" could mean, except when an extra term is inserted (i.e. "Dutch ethnic persuasion" or "Greek ethnic persuasion"). Right?

Túrin

Ethnic used in the way that he used it is a misused term - but, misused by so many that it might as well have that meaning. It means, used like that, 'a different race' or 'of different nationality' or with heritage equivalent to one of those things. A misuse, but a common one.

Thanks, Golem.  I'm actually thankful that Turin had to have it explained to him.  It suggests that the usage might not be nearly as prevalent as I thought, which eases my mind.  But when I do hear it (and I often do), it grinds my gears.

I am well aware of its actual meaning and etymology, and that is perfectly fine.

@LC: it really is a shame that christians like the ones you described (i assume youre one) don't get as much airttime as the ones like this guy; i think those are the christians that realize that jesus spoke more about Love and Peace then he did about the morality of d&d.

@ElDo: is it just me, or is it a bit confusing when these people call themselves "fundamentalists", and have so many rules like that? traditionalists, maybe, but i would imagine that a true fundamentalist would stick to nothing but the common (read: fundamental) traits of christianity, most of which you've mentioned.

edit- on the subject of "ethnic persuasion", i'm reminded of an old george carlin bit, where he commented on how people would say things like, "he happens to be black". his parents were black? yes. and they had sex? yes, yes! and now he happens to be black? yes! i'd be more suprised if he happened to be white...

And that's a great example of how euphemisms can be more insulting than their uncensored counterparts.

Humanism, just fyi, was originally a Christian concept, founded by people like Erasmus in the 16th century. Essentially its concern was less over institutions than with people, believing that the former must serve the latter.

I agree that religious fundamentalism, Christian in this case, is a problem because that minority seems often to be louder than everyone else. Part of the problem with that is that Christians who like myself don't want to grab power over other people more than they want to actually follow the Gospel of Christ are often too busy doing just that to be focused on getting airtime.

However what I find worst of all about people like Jack Chick is that they LIE. Everything I've read from his works where he is demonizing someone is full of inaccuracies. It's rather disturbing. In a class I was teaching at an evanglical college a student asked me if it was true that Roman Catholicism was a cult. (meaning in the purely negative sense) I'm sure most here have read the Chick tract about D&D...with its weird inaccuracies.
(the "Dungeon Mistress", the strange rules of play, the voodoo like attachment to character, the utter misunderstandings of how neopagan morality works...)

What I do recommend though for those who would combat this kind of thing:

1. Be aware of what is actually in the Bible. Sometimes they are misquoting things.

2. Be aware that they don't care if they misquote things. They are after power, not accuracy.

3. Be aware that they can be discredited. Many of them have nasty secrets.

Ultimately, this is a good example of why you should be careful of your rights and not let such things go unnoticed. Those who would burn books may burn people.

Quote from: sdragon1984- the S is for penguin@LC: it really is a shame that christians like the ones you described (i assume youre one) don't get as much airttime as the ones like this guy; i think those are the christians that realize that jesus spoke more about Love and Peace then he did about the morality of d&d.

There are always going to be people who miss the forest for the trees. Some of them are going to go a step further, and see the trees from a funny angle, so that they look like Scary Clowns. Some of them are going to go a step further still, and tell everyone they know that the purpose of the forest is therefore to warn us all that circuses are bad for you. Even if you consider the Bible to be literal, divine, or uncorrupted by human influence (and I consider it to be none of these things), the vital, core ideas of the book are clear. Some people (on both sides of the issue!) just seem to ignore, selectively apply, or entirely contradict those ideas, and somehow claim they aren't missing the point completely.

It's like Aesop's fables. We can look at the story of the Lion and the Mouse and easily see that it's a silly fable with a useful moral: it's best to be kind to people in all stations of life. I don't have to prove to anyone that the events of the story actually happened in order for most people to agree that the moral is pretty good advice. Now, we could look at this story and conclude instead that "Thou Shalt Not Eat the Meat of the Sacred Rodent," or we could say "this story and its moral are stupid because animals can't talk, therefore this could never actually have happened," but either way, that's missing the point.

Quote from: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/firmamentfirmament[/url] than with the fundament. Ha, ha. Oh my. What an amusing accident of linguistics.)

The term "Fundamentalist" originated a long, long time back, and was originally chosen by a particular preacher whose name escapes me to describe a "back to fundamentals" approach which emphasized scripture and the practices of early Christians.

To justify this particularly central position of scripture over tradition, he started down the path of inerrancy. Since then the term has been applied to other forms of religion (such as Wahhabism wrt Islam) that take (or claim to take) a similar approach in some sense.

no... i think LC managed to pinpoint why theyre called fundamentalists.

LC, i agree 110% with that view on the bible. to stretch your analogy a little bit further, i would say that once one has that sort of understanding of the bible, really, isn't historical accuracy pretty much irrelevant? either way, the message is still there.

edit- by the way, if i had to suggest one chapter in the entire bible as required christian reading, i would suggest romans 14; yes, i have been told that it's supposed to only apply to christians, but i feel many christians could benefit by asking if it could be applied to pretty much most religions. though, to be fair, i think that's a lesson the CBG christians already know.

as the gaming, non-christian son of a man who respectabley declined Deaconhood, i would like to give this thread a big bumpage.

also, ontop of trying to get the current discussions of religion in general, and religion against d&d, i would like to add something else: campaigns and adventures that are religious in tone. i've been trying to think of what i can do to slowly introduce my father to the game, and have started him off with creating a simplified version of a human fighter, and plan on integrating christian tones once we start a campaign. if anybody has any ideas on how to do this, feel free to post them! in the meantime, i have found  this site for a few ideas.

 :ontopic:  in searching for ideas for said campaign, i came across several sites, such as http://www.mjyoung.net/dungeon/confess.html and my personal favorite, http://www.religioustolerance.org/d_a_d2.htm that do a very good job at countering the religious anti-RPG movement (as aknowledgement, i do realize it's from the vocal minority; that, unfortunately, doesn't mean it's entirely nonexistant).