Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

I am religious and believe in free will

71 (27.7%)

I am religious and do not believe in free will

10 (3.9%)

I am not religious and believe in free will

114 (44.5%)

I am not religious and do not believe in free will

61 (23.8%)

Total Members Voted: 251

[TempAcc]

Well nordic myth IS rather popular, like greek mythology. It has really cool elements built into it (gods that are badasses, huge battles, full of heroes and epic tales, etc), and had some really interesting syncretic interactions with christianity (at one point in norway, Jesus was worshipped alongside Thor, for example). Its no surprise it got used in some very famous operas and many other stuff in recent times. Lord of the Rings, for example, was inspired in nordic myth in many ways, though under a christianized view.

[origamiscienceguy]

Well nordic myth IS rather popular, like greek mythology. It has really cool elements built into it (gods that are badasses, huge battles, full of heroes and epic tales, etc), and had some really interesting syncretic interactions with christianity (at one point in norway, Jesus was worshipped alongside Thor, for example). Its no surprise it got used in some very famous operas and many other stuff in recent times. Lord of the Rings, for example, was inspired in nordic myth in many ways, though under a christianized view.

The bible also has its fair share of huge battles. So it really isn't all that different in that sense.

[TD1]

It has huge battles, but they're not necessarily epic battles. There weren't great heroes that fought with flaming swords, with the fate of the world at stake. That would be epic. A huge battle is WWII.

[TempAcc]

 Nordic myth has a greater focus on individuals, rather than just the "a huge battle happens" thing the bible often does. Ragnarok, for example, is full of references to who will fight who, how and what will happen to them. Its the ancient equivalent to an action movie. Nordic myth has its fair share of side stories, too, and many of them are kinda like some sort of saturday morning cartoon episode, in that they're entertaining but also carry some sort of message.

[Rose]

They're also foreign, which I think lends them more to reinterpretation and usage.

It's a lot easier to have make and have accepted a comic book character based off of a foreign and dead religion than one that the authors and readers actually practice,for example. Otherwise you'd have Jesus in the avengers.

[TD1]

The Bible has always seemed rather dry to me, but I really enjoy Norse mythology.

Otherwise you'd have Jesus in the avengers.

Now that would be epic.

"Quick, Jesus! Walk over that water to defeat the foe with spontaneously appearing baskets of bread!"

[TempAcc]

I'm surprised there aren't more media that makes use of hinduism, who is also full of epic tales with awesome heroes and vishnu turning into his huge lion headed avatar and ripping the villain apart limb by limb.

[penguinofhonor]

Dry? Most of the Bible is, but if you know where to look there's a lot of entertaining stuff. Like lewd poetry? Song of Songs is like 50% about boobs. Want action? The tale of Samson is a solid story about a demigod killing a ton of bad guys. Incomprehensible cosmic horror is more your thing? Ezekiel is there for you.

[origamiscienceguy]

If you want to be disgusted, read Hosea!

Yeah, the bible definitely isn't a children's book.

[Rolan7]

@tempacc
Yeah, a shame. I think Japa's right aboutthe reasoning.

Jesus would be the one black character whose brave self sacrifice lets everyone defeat the villain?

I remember reading a set of entertaining bit raunchy Norse stories. Skeggas Edda I think? Can't check atm. I think they were pretty NSFW at times though.

Of course I later learned that Frigg (Freya?) buying the Dwarven necklace was old canon not fanfic...

[Graknorke]

Otherwise you'd have Jesus in the avengers.

No, Jesus is legitimately more boring. I think it's the lack of humanity in the character, which is ironic given his role in the narrative. No particularly strong (personal) likes or dislikes, no vices, never wrong or fooled by anything... just not something an audience could ever relate to or understand much.
In Norse mythology Thor does things wrong and has problems and isn't operating on his perfect plan all the time. And at the same time he's operating with understandable motives.

Ninjad: I guess Samson could count, but he was also very very murdery with nowhere near a good enough reason that I've ever been able to discern. He could work in a Michael Bay style film where everything's blown up and the plot doesn't matter.

[origamiscienceguy]

What about Daniel? He has quite a number of interesting events (even though we don't know what happened the 65 years between Daniel 4 and 5)

chapters 1-4 he's around 15 years old, then chapter 5 and he's suddenly 80-ish years. Whatever.

[MaximumZero]

No particularly strong (personal) likes or dislikes, no vices, never wrong or fooled by anything... just not something an audience could ever relate to or understand much.

Hates traders in the temple (and broke out a whip to prove it,) liked alcohol and hanging with bums, pissed off by a fig tree that refused to bear him fruit out of season, stole a horse to teach his boys a lesson by having it destroy their clothes, and has a couple sweet one liners, like, "I bring not peace, but a sword." Let's face it, Jesus isn't in the Avengers because it would piss off most Americans, and Thor is regarded as mythology instead of mainstream religion. Maybe in the Avengers 3600AD.

[Shadowlord]

13 NEW REPLIES!? YE FLIPPING GODS. Oh, okay, they're all about Thor.

I have a question:

How many people here arguing for Christianity are believers, and how many are playing Devils advocate?

I am a believer.

And Neil Diamond started singing in my head: "I couldn't leave her if I tried."

Is this so hard to grasp? I've seen plenty of atheists write about why humans are greedy, short-sighted, xenophobic or tribal, violent, etc, usually giving an evolutionary explanation. Original sin is Christianity explaining the same thing. It's not saying humans are any more evil than they observably are.

Original sin isn't even remotely comparable. http://www.religioustolerance.org/sin_gene.htm

It's like if you invented a nanobot that could give any animal human-level intelligence, human-like vocal cords, and the ability to speak, and you injected said nanobots into a fruit. Then you sat it on the table, told your dog not to eat it, and walked away. Then, when you come back and it's gone, you throw a fit, tell him you only had ONE RULE and he BROKE IT, so that's it, he's OUT! FOREVER! Oh, and you're cursing the whole earth, and the plants, and him too, because you're just that furious. (For simplicity, I didn't try to include two dogs, fig leaves, or a fruit tree, although one expects they would go for the fruit tree just as well and it's just a matter of one dog not keeping the other dog from eating any )

[Bohandas]

They're also foreign, which I think lends them more to reinterpretation and usage.

It's a lot easier to have make and have accepted a comic book character based off of a foreign and dead religion than one that the authors and readers actually practice,for example. Otherwise you'd have Jesus in the avengers.

That was basically the premise of the final act of that South Park episode where they fight David Blaine