A Continuation (Religious site vs. DnD and other RPGs)

[brainface]

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.

really and truely believe[/i] that they're doing the right thing. Even if that right thing is burning Harry Potter books and etc. ad nauseam. There's corruption at the top; but i doubt it's actually universal--i imagine a lot of fundamentalist leaders also believe they're doing the best thing they can do with their time.

A disturbing trend I've noticed is that you can have an angry fundamentalist evangelical who thinks all non-baptists are going to hell and also feeds the homeless and builds wheelchair ramps for old people. It's hard to accurately divide people into groups of purely benevolent and purely malevolent.

[khyron1144]

I am probably the wrong guy to put forth his view point in D&D vs. extremely-conservative-witch-hunting-Christianity discussions at least as far as positive press for D&D is concerned.

I got involved with RPGs at a young age.

I currently identify with a non-traditional, minority religion oriented towards the worship of something other than The God of the Bible (in my case solitary/ unorganized animism).

I don't see these facts as having anything to do with each other in my own personal history.  I can't pin-point an exact source of my troubles with Christianity and my quest for something else.  I do think it may have something to do with my looking at political philosophy when I was a teenager and deciding that I'm an anarchist.  At some point, an organized church and even God became just one more oppressor of the individual in my opinion.

Somewhere I came across the concept of animism, the belief that there is a God in everything or else that everything is God.  It felt right to my anarchist sensibility for the rocks, trees, small, fuzzy animals, you and me to all be on the same footing since there is a God in each of us.

RPGs have always been just a way for me to blow off steam and express my creativity.

Never-the-less I have no doubt that some would say oh, he plays D&D, off course he's an agent of Satan.

I am also slightly familiar with the writings of Anton Lavey, the founder of the Church of Satan, in the books Satan Speaks! and The Devil's Notebook.  They are just something that I've started reading in my effort to become a little more knowledgable in the world's various religious, philosophical, mythological, and magical systems.  I do not think most of the teachings contained in his writings are ideas that will facillitate the human race's transition to a world of happiness and peace for all.

[Polycarp]

Well, I just saw this thread now.  As far as the discussion on "Christianity vs. Roleplaying" goes, I don't really have much to add.  As a Christian, I just don't understand where a conflict arises; I have yet to see a roleplayer that actually worhsips some D&D deity, and until I do I'm inclined to dismiss the whole argument as rubbish.  It is a classic case of obsessive focus on what does not matter in lieu of focus on what actually does.  Frankly, getting all steamed up at D&D in a world where peace, justice, and humility are desperately needed elsewhere is a gross perversion of Christ's call to action - and in my opinion, so is the "born-again" movement generally.

With regards to making religious campaigns, religion is something I try to pay a lot of attention to.  I've never really like the "faithless" traditional D&D gods with their obvious existence, and my campaigns tend towards making cosmic powers inscrutable and objects of faith and contention.  Religion in a campaign is far more interesting to me when it includes an aspect of faith - is the mighty ruler's claim to be a god incarnate actually true?  Do you want to risk finding out?  I enjoy the depth added by powers whose presence is not simply a matter of course.

[Wensleydale]

I'm just surprised this thread is still around. ;)

[SDragon]

I don't really think this is true. I think the vast majority of the angry evangelical fundamentalists really and truely believe that they're doing the right thing. Even if that right thing is burning Harry Potter books and etc. ad nauseam. There's corruption at the top; but i doubt it's actually universal--i imagine a lot of fundamentalist leaders also believe they're doing the best thing they can do with their time.

A disturbing trend I've noticed is that you can have an angry fundamentalist evangelical who thinks all non-baptists are going to hell and also feeds the homeless and builds wheelchair ramps for old people. It's hard to accurately divide people into groups of purely benevolent and purely malevolent.

what's really upsetting is, how do you appropriately react to people like that? i mean, if they were doing something that was wrong, and they knew it was wrong, that would be one thing. how can you convince somebody that the act that they truely believe to be helpful, in fact, is harmful?

[Stargate525]

what's really upsetting is, how do you appropriately react to people like that? i mean, if they were doing something that was wrong, and they knew it was wrong, that would be one thing. how can you convince somebody that the act that they truly believe to be helpful, in fact, is harmful?

I don't think that you can, really. In my experience, people who believe in things to that magnitude (thinking D&D is inspired by the devil, for instance) look at anyone trying to persuade them with logic as someone trying to corrupt them.

Usually the only thing is to keep working on them, and sooner or later they'll come to the truth.

[SDragon]

what's really upsetting is, how do you appropriately react to people like that? i mean, if they were doing something that was wrong, and they knew it was wrong, that would be one thing. how can you convince somebody that the act that they truly believe to be helpful, in fact, is harmful?

I don't think that you can, really. In my experience, people who believe in things to that magnitude (thinking D&D is inspired by the devil, for instance) look at anyone trying to persuade them with logic as someone trying to corrupt them.

Usually the only thing is to keep working on them, and hope that sooner or later they'll come to the truth.

(bold, mine)

That's what makes it scary. The alternative (mixing semi-conflicting liberal and conservative views), while it can be frustratingly annoying, is still much more managable. It wasn't D&D that brought up what was essentially the following conversation, but I imagine it could apply to any religiously controversial manufactured good:


"What do you think of [ insert religiously controversial manufactured good here ]?"
"It's of the devil!"
[note: fans of The Waterboy should be able to see where I'm going with this)
"Well, do you think it has any mystical powers attached to it, in any way?"
"Not one bit!"


Now, assuming it was known, without any shadow of a doubt, D&D is, for a fact "of the devil", and assuming it was equally established that D&D doesn't have any mystical powers whatsoever (this is propbably the easier assumption for here; We already know it doesn't), then how would it be any more threatening then.... Say, this here grain of sand that we know is "of the devil"?