Religion in Comics

6 views
Skip to first unread message

jonn...@my-deja.com

unread,
Nov 8, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/8/00
to
Can somebody explain something that has been bugging me for a long
time? What is the deal with religion in comics over the past 60 years
or so? I guess it all started in the golden age with the debut of
Wonder Woman, a modern day amazon. Then came the Specter, who's
supposed to be a spirit of God. Now it seems that in comics all
religions are real(yes I know that the OHOTMU says that there is no one
ominipoten deity but just a bunch of pantheons but still). Marvel has
interactions with the olympians and the asgardians all the time. DC has
Zauriel taking everybody into Heaven during "Day of Judgement" with WW
praying to the olympians the whole time, and they also had Aztec
getting his powers from an ancient aztec diety. This concept is highly
illogical. How do writers get away with these stories without causing
confussion. Am I the only one who notices these things, or are there
just that many atheists out there?


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Dave Whiteley

unread,
Nov 8, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/8/00
to
I don't think it has so much to do with athiesm as willing suspension
of disbelief. Whether someone is religious or not, the various
pantheons that are presented in comics are not (usually) presented in
a way to change the readers' religious beliefs. That is, I doubt Walt
SImonson wanted to turn everyone into a bunch of Asgardian worshippers
during his Thor run, or Morrison wanted us to believe that there
really are angels like Zauriel in "Heaven". It's all just to tell a
story!

Why should these various pantheons cause any more confusion than
multiple earths, clones, international cabals or the like? Would you
have the same criticisms about the countless fictional governments or
countries in comics?

Dave Whiteley

Peter Likidis

unread,
Nov 8, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/8/00
to

jonn...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> Can somebody explain something that has been bugging me for a long
> time? What is the deal with religion in comics over the past 60 years
> or so? I guess it all started in the golden age with the debut of
> Wonder Woman, a modern day amazon. Then came the Specter, who's
> supposed to be a spirit of God. Now it seems that in comics all
> religions are real(yes I know that the OHOTMU says that there is no one
> ominipoten deity but just a bunch of pantheons but still). Marvel has
> interactions with the olympians and the asgardians all the time. DC has
> Zauriel taking everybody into Heaven during "Day of Judgement" with WW
> praying to the olympians the whole time, and they also had Aztec
> getting his powers from an ancient aztec diety. This concept is highly
> illogical. How do writers get away with these stories without causing
> confussion. Am I the only one who notices these things, or are there
> just that many atheists out there?

I guess because they are presenting real beings and not regligious ones?

Paul O'Brien

unread,
Nov 8, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/8/00
to
In article <8uc8gb$388$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, jonn...@my-deja.com writes

>Can somebody explain something that has been bugging me for a long
>time? What is the deal with religion in comics over the past 60 years
>or so?

Religions are basically mythic stories and therefore fit rather
well into a superhero mythos - as long as you're not using one that
the audience take deadly seriously, in which case they'll be mortally
offended at the trivialisation of their religious beliefs.

Paul O'Brien
THE X-AXIS REVIEWS - http://www.esoterica.demon.co.uk

From the relatively fashionable west end of Glasgow.

Vicarious

unread,
Nov 8, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/8/00
to
JESUS MAN!!!

A Mutant Jesusman created as the rebirth of the son of god. Powers include
healing factor and abilty to change objects from one to another like water
to wine. Can walk on water, and can not be killed.

Paul O'Brien <pa...@esoterica.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:k4f1hnA2...@esoterica.demon.co.uk...

TK-421

unread,
Nov 8, 2000, 7:30:45 PM11/8/00
to
No one takes the Jesus stuff deadly seriously these days do they?


do they?


oh well...

Peter Likidis

unread,
Nov 8, 2000, 7:52:02 PM11/8/00
to

TK-421 wrote:
>
> No one takes the Jesus stuff deadly seriously these days do they?
>
> do they?
>
> oh well...
>

uhmmm Dogma?

Elayne Riggs

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/9/00
to
jonn...@my-deja.com happened to mention:

> Now it seems that in comics all

> religions are real...


> How do writers get away with these stories without causing
> confussion.

They trust that their readers will understand it's fiction?

- Elayne

Tom Henderson

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/9/00
to
Not to get into a sermon, or start a huge off-topic thread, but there is
incredible historical evidence for the existence of Jesus, and the
validity of the Bible. So, to answer your question, there are people
that take the Jesus stuff seriously, and with good reason.

In article <rvrj0t03jg5c3cpc6...@4ax.com>,

Tue Sorensen

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/9/00
to
In article <8uc8gb$388$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,

jonn...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Can somebody explain something that has been bugging me for a long
> time? What is the deal with religion in comics over the past 60 years
> or so?

There isn't one.

> I guess it all started in the golden age with the debut of
> Wonder Woman, a modern day amazon. Then came the Specter, who's
> supposed to be a spirit of God. Now it seems that in comics all
> religions are real(yes I know that the OHOTMU says that there is no
one
> ominipoten deity but just a bunch of pantheons but still).

Well, in the Marvel Universe, most religions are based on actual
pan-dimensional (or whatever) beings like the Asgardians, etc. These are
not *really* divine beings, but simply people filled with strange
energies and such. Same thing for magic. In the recent Reed Richards #
2, Reed explains that magic is just another form of science, following
other (but still scientific) rules. The energy behind magic is known as
"arcana", and may be the same that powers the various pantheons. One of
the coolest recent stories featuring this "science magic" was FF Annual
'99, featuring the brilliant character Mechamage. Miss it at your
peril!!

In the DC Universe (as opposed to Marvel), deities receive power from
their followers' worship (most clearly shown in the classic Brother
Blood storyline in NEW TEEN TITANS). Wonder Woman's amazon
island, Themiscyra, was created so that there would still be someone to
worship the Greek gods after the outside world had stopped beliving in
them. What happens when nobody worships a pantheon was chronicled
(somewhat tongue in cheek) in the VEXT mini-series (from '98, I think),
where an obscure pantheon of gods was shut down due to insufficient
worship. Fun stuff!

> Marvel has
> interactions with the olympians and the asgardians all the time. DC
has
> Zauriel taking everybody into Heaven during "Day of Judgement" with WW
> praying to the olympians the whole time, and they also had Aztec
> getting his powers from an ancient aztec diety. This concept is highly

> illogical. How do writers get away with these stories without causing
> confusion.

Simple - they don't. Lots of those stories (esp. at DC) are totally
inconsistent with each other. Also, many of the stories featuring
religious entities are probably to be read in a somewhat non-literal
way. Cosmic entities like Eternity and the Living Tribunal are some sort
of representations of the combined mental power of all the sentient
people in the universe - or something like that. They're not individuals
in the usual sense.

> are there just that many atheists out there?

God, I hope so!

- Tue Sorensen

Mikey 5-0

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/9/00
to
On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 19:11:16 GMT, jonn...@my-deja.com wrote:

>Can somebody explain something that has been bugging me for a long
>time? What is the deal with religion in comics over the past 60 years

>or so? I guess it all started in the golden age with the debut of


>Wonder Woman, a modern day amazon. Then came the Specter, who's
>supposed to be a spirit of God. Now it seems that in comics all
>religions are real(yes I know that the OHOTMU says that there is no one

>ominipoten deity but just a bunch of pantheons but still). Marvel has


>interactions with the olympians and the asgardians all the time. DC has
>Zauriel taking everybody into Heaven during "Day of Judgement" with WW
>praying to the olympians the whole time, and they also had Aztec
>getting his powers from an ancient aztec diety. This concept is highly
>illogical. How do writers get away with these stories without causing

>confussion. Am I the only one who notices these things, or are there


>just that many atheists out there?

Simple answer? There ARE that many athiests out there. This is the Age
of Science, after all.

Although, frankly - I dont see whats bugging you - that a number of
different pantheons can exist at any one time? There are quite a few
in the real world, you know.

I've always thought of it as thus: the gods need belief to exist, but
once that belief occurs - as it has for all these pantheons - then the
gods and goddesses are there permanently, with all their powers intact
for all time. Of course, most of them have decided that the mortal
plane is boring, and so they dont play there any more (more likely the
case that Big G doesnt play fair and pushed them all out, the rotter)

Certainly its a better explanation than "We're all aliens, except Big
G, who just happens to be the Mythical Figure most of our readers
believe in. Big G's the only real one. And he's the most powerful
too."

Besides, its comics - and dammit, if a man decides to dance around in
his longjohns calling himself Spider Man - then I want my mythical
godlings and deities!


Mikey 5-0
=====
'In heaven you become what you hope. In hell you
become what you fear...' - Von Bek, Michael Moorcock
=====
Remove 'nospam' and replace with 'kestril' to email me

Mikey 5-0

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/9/00
to
On Thu, 09 Nov 2000 00:30:45 +0000, TK-421 <paul...@bigfoot.com>
wrote:

>No one takes the Jesus stuff deadly seriously these days do they?
>
>
>do they?

Sadly, I already have one friend telling me I should go to Church and
witness 'the revelation of God' and that I wont believe the things
I'll see. He has since been warned not to speak of such things again,
lest he feel the weight of my shovel about his bonce.

I'd rather there was no God. Id rather humanity made it here because
damn it - we sweated, we bled, and we earnt it! And I want to believe
tht mankind has a great destiny, that the stars are our birthright -
and not that it may all end tomorrow because God decides that time is
up, and the games over, and okay - lets see the colour of your soul,
matey.

For me, life with God is a sad, depressing thing.

I feel I should mention that I have quite a few Christian friends, and
Im not exactly anti-Christian - I just dont need it in my life.
Another of my friends is quite devout, and we can discuss religion
till the cows come home. He respects that each person lives their own
life, and he's not once told me that he has felt the presence of God,
unlike my friend who is gonna get his head beat in if he keeps
pestering me.

I just really dont like sanctimonious prats telling me I have to go to
church as if Im missing something in my life because I dont follow
their God. So for all those faithful Christians out there, doing the
good work - on ya! And for all those bible bashers - youre gonna rot
in hell!

Mikey 5-0

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/9/00
to
On Wed, 8 Nov 2000 14:24:17 -0800, "Vicarious"
<no...@nospam.plethera.com> wrote:

>JESUS MAN!!!
>
>A Mutant Jesusman created as the rebirth of the son of god. Powers include
>healing factor and abilty to change objects from one to another like water
>to wine. Can walk on water, and can not be killed.

Give it to Alan Moore, or Warren Ellis - set it in Scotland (the
resting place of the Holy Grail?) - and do a 12, maybe 24-issue
maxi-series about the second coming of Jesus in cold, dank raining
Glasgow.

Perhaps this time Jesus will choose humanity over divinity? Very
bleak, very depressing, very 'nobody cares, faith is dead' kind of
series.

Id buy it.

gzyw...@my-deja.com

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/9/00
to
In article <8uc8gb$388$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,

jonn...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Can somebody explain something that has been bugging me for a long
> time? What is the deal with religion in comics over the past 60 years
> or so?

I can't answer - I've been too distracted by flying people who can lift
weights that should crush tissue, guys who can change their mass at
will, and people who can exceed lightspeed to notice any 'deal'.

Greg Zywicki

gzyw...@my-deja.com

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/9/00
to
In article <3a0aa5ff...@news.iinet.net.au>,
nos...@echidna.id.au (Mikey 5-0) wrote:

> Perhaps this time Jesus will choose humanity over divinity? Very
> bleak, very depressing, very 'nobody cares, faith is dead' kind of
> series.
>
> Id buy it.
>
> Mikey 5-0

I'm confused, what do you mean "this time?" He chose hummanity last
time. Died and all. Fully human, fully divine.

What? But you put up with people flying and turning in to animals.

gzyw...@my-deja.com

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/9/00
to
> No one takes the Jesus stuff deadly seriously these days do they?
>
> do they?
>

Only those of us who know him.

jonn...@my-deja.com

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/9/00
to
In article <3a09a7cb.13104199@news>,

dwhit...@home.commonkeys (Dave Whiteley) wrote:
> I don't think it has so much to do with athiesm as willing suspension
> of disbelief. Whether someone is religious or not, the various
> pantheons that are presented in comics are not (usually) presented in
> a way to change the readers' religious beliefs. That is, I doubt Walt
> SImonson wanted to turn everyone into a bunch of Asgardian worshippers
> during his Thor run, or Morrison wanted us to believe that there
> really are angels like Zauriel in "Heaven". It's all just to tell a
> story!
>
> Why should these various pantheons cause any more confusion than
> multiple earths, clones, international cabals or the like? Would you
> have the same criticisms about the countless fictional governments or
> countries in comics?

It's crossed my mind. I'd read about all the fictional US cities in DC
and all the fictional nations in Marvel, and wonder; where are these
places?

> Dave Whiteley


>
> On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 19:11:16 GMT, jonn...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> >Can somebody explain something that has been bugging me for a long
> >time? What is the deal with religion in comics over the past 60 years

> >or so? I guess it all started in the golden age with the debut of
> >Wonder Woman, a modern day amazon. Then came the Specter, who's
> >supposed to be a spirit of God. Now it seems that in comics all
> >religions are real(yes I know that the OHOTMU says that there is no
one
> >ominipoten deity but just a bunch of pantheons but still). Marvel has
> >interactions with the olympians and the asgardians all the time. DC
has
> >Zauriel taking everybody into Heaven during "Day of Judgement" with
WW
> >praying to the olympians the whole time, and they also had Aztec
> >getting his powers from an ancient aztec diety. This concept is
highly
> >illogical. How do writers get away with these stories without causing
> >confussion. Am I the only one who notices these things, or are there
> >just that many atheists out there?
> >
> >

jonn...@my-deja.com

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/9/00
to
In article <3a0aa5ff...@news.iinet.net.au>,
nos...@echidna.id.au (Mikey 5-0) wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Nov 2000 14:24:17 -0800, "Vicarious"
> <no...@nospam.plethera.com> wrote:
>
> >JESUS MAN!!!
> >
> >A Mutant Jesusman created as the rebirth of the son of god. Powers
include
> >healing factor and abilty to change objects from one to another like
water
> >to wine. Can walk on water, and can not be killed.
>
> Give it to Alan Moore, or Warren Ellis - set it in Scotland (the
> resting place of the Holy Grail?) - and do a 12, maybe 24-issue
> maxi-series about the second coming of Jesus in cold, dank raining
> Glasgow.
>
> Perhaps this time Jesus will choose humanity over divinity? Very
> bleak, very depressing, very 'nobody cares, faith is dead' kind of
> series.
>
> Id buy it.

That story sounds more like Garth Ennis's style if you ask me. I know
for sure I wouldn't read it.

> Mikey 5-0
> =====
> 'In heaven you become what you hope. In hell you
> become what you fear...' - Von Bek, Michael Moorcock
> =====
> Remove 'nospam' and replace with 'kestril' to email me
>

jonn...@my-deja.com

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/9/00
to
In article <k4f1hnA2...@esoterica.demon.co.uk>,
Paul O'Brien <pa...@esoterica.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <8uc8gb$388$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, jonn...@my-deja.com writes

> >Can somebody explain something that has been bugging me for a long
> >time? What is the deal with religion in comics over the past 60 years
> >or so?
>
> Religions are basically mythic stories and therefore fit rather
> well into a superhero mythos - as long as you're not using one that
> the audience take deadly seriously, in which case they'll be mortally
> offended at the trivialisation of their religious beliefs.

The majority of religious people in this country are either Chirstians
or Jews(I think jews are the second most), yet I've never seen or heard
of anybody complaining about Zauriel(or for that matter Preacher). Not
even the Christian Coalition or the Southern Baptisits have said
anything about it to my knowledg(and that I find very surprising). Now
that I think about it, I don't recall any buddist or hindu stories in
comics.

> Paul O'Brien
> THE X-AXIS REVIEWS - http://www.esoterica.demon.co.uk
>
> From the relatively fashionable west end of Glasgow.
>

jonn...@my-deja.com

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/9/00
to
> No one takes the Jesus stuff deadly seriously these days do they?
>
> do they?
>
> oh well...

Go to a church some Sunday. You'll find out then.

Decanos

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/9/00
to
On Thu, 09 Nov 2000 14:12:06 GMT, nos...@echidna.id.au (Mikey 5-0)

>
>I just really dont like sanctimonious prats telling me I have to go to
>church as if Im missing something in my life because I dont follow
>their God. So for all those faithful Christians out there, doing the
>good work - on ya! And for all those bible bashers - youre gonna rot
>in hell!

Come on. Regardless of whether they're right or wrong,
they're at least acting out of concern and a desire to
help. One might disagree with their assessment, but
it seems mighty harsh to return their concern (however
ardent) with threats.

I take the same attitude toward Momon and Jehovah's
Witness door-knockers. Even though I disagree with
them -- for many reasons -- I do commend them for
their presistence and desire to help.

TK-421

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/9/00
to
Oh yeah, I believe that there is evidence that there was a historical
person, I just don't believe that there is any evidence that it
happened the way it was depicted in the Bible (which was rewritten in
the Middle Ages).


And it was just a joke anyway.

On Thu, 09 Nov 2000 13:57:35 GMT, Tom Henderson
<tomhen...@my-deja.com> wrote:

>Not to get into a sermon, or start a huge off-topic thread, but there is
>incredible historical evidence for the existence of Jesus, and the
>validity of the Bible. So, to answer your question, there are people
>that take the Jesus stuff seriously, and with good reason.
>

TK-421

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/9/00
to
On Thu, 09 Nov 2000 16:01:51 GMT, gzyw...@my-deja.com wrote:

>> No one takes the Jesus stuff deadly seriously these days do they?
>>
>> do they?
>>
>

>Only those of us who know him.
>
>Greg Zywicki
>
>

>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.


You don't know him, he's been dead for nearly 2000 years

TK-421

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/9/00
to
On Thu, 09 Nov 2000 16:39:14 GMT, jonn...@my-deja.com wrote:

>
>Go to a church some Sunday. You'll find out then.


I've got better things to do on a Sunday thank you very much

Rami Rautkorpi

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/9/00
to

<jonn...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8uej7o$de$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...

> In article <3a0aa5ff...@news.iinet.net.au>,
> nos...@echidna.id.au (Mikey 5-0) wrote:
> > Give it to Alan Moore, or Warren Ellis - set it in Scotland (the
> > resting place of the Holy Grail?) - and do a 12, maybe 24-issue
> > maxi-series about the second coming of Jesus in cold, dank raining
> > Glasgow.
> >
> > Perhaps this time Jesus will choose humanity over divinity? Very
> > bleak, very depressing, very 'nobody cares, faith is dead' kind of
> > series.
>
> That story sounds more like Garth Ennis's style if you ask me. I know
> for sure I wouldn't read it.

I've always found Ennis's stories very optimistic and fun to read, not bleak
or depressing at all. Ellis on the other hand - I'm afraid he might actually
do it! I hope he never finds out about this idea :-)

--
Rami Rautkorpi
http://koti.mbnet.fi/ramir
--
"If you're so smart
why can't you see your own head
without a reflective surface?" -Grant Morrison

Paul O'Brien

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/9/00
to
In article <8uejrv$v4$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, jonn...@my-deja.com writes

>
>The majority of religious people in this country are either Chirstians
>or Jews(I think jews are the second most), yet I've never seen or heard
>of anybody complaining about Zauriel(or for that matter Preacher).

Preacher got a few complaints. The lack of reaction to Zauriel from
the religious groups did surprise me somewhat - not because of
Zauriel himself, who was a perfectly innocuous character, but because
his back story involved corruption in Heaven which God didn't seem
to be aware of, suggesting that God wasn't doing a terribly good job
up there.

Paul O'Brien

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/9/00
to
In article <8uejvi$10j$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, jonn...@my-deja.com writes

>
>Go to a church some Sunday. You'll find out then.

I'd love to, but I spend my Sundays raping goats and sacrificing
children. It's a hard life, but pleasurable.

speculato...@my-deja.com

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/9/00
to

> > nos...@echidna.id.au (Mikey 5-0) wrote:
> > > Give it to Alan Moore, or Warren Ellis - set it in Scotland (the
> > > resting place of the Holy Grail?) - and do a 12, maybe 24-issue
> > > maxi-series about the second coming of Jesus in cold, dank raining
> > > Glasgow.
> > >
> > > Perhaps this time Jesus will choose humanity over divinity? Very
> > > bleak, very depressing, very 'nobody cares, faith is dead' kind of
> > > series.

> <jonn...@my-deja.com> wrote in message


> > That story sounds more like Garth Ennis's style if you ask me. I
know
> > for sure I wouldn't read it.

"Rami Rautkorpi" <rami.ra...@mbnet.fi> wrote:
> I've always found Ennis's stories very optimistic and fun to read, not
bleak
> or depressing at all. Ellis on the other hand - I'm afraid he might
actually
> do it! I hope he never finds out about this idea :-)

There's an interview with Ennis published online at
http://www.orb-store.com/rassmag/001020.htm

Religion is mentioned ...

MTFBWY,
Speculator

Dodds

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/9/00
to
Talking of raping animals...
i read in the paper a few weeks back about some strange laws. One of
them was that, in some Islamic countries (can't remember which ones),
there is a law that if a man has sexual intercourse with a lamb, it is
illegal if he eats it's flesh. Now, is it just me, or is there
something wrong with that law...?
It's a good job that rape demon from Hellblazer;Newcastle wasn't in an
islamic country!

Ronan

Paul O'Brien wrote:
>
> In article <8uejvi$10j$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, jonn...@my-deja.com writes
> >
> >Go to a church some Sunday. You'll find out then.
>
> I'd love to, but I spend my Sundays raping goats and sacrificing
> children. It's a hard life, but pleasurable.
>

Matt Sheridan

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/9/00
to
<jonn...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8uej7o$de$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
>
> > >JESUS MAN!!!

> >
> > Give it to Alan Moore, or Warren Ellis - set it in Scotland (the
> > resting place of the Holy Grail?) - and do a 12, maybe 24-issue
> > maxi-series about the second coming of Jesus in cold, dank raining
> > Glasgow.
>
> That story sounds more like Garth Ennis's style if you ask me. I know
> for sure I wouldn't read it.

And I know for sure I would.

Matt

Carl Fink

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 7:39:50 PM11/9/00
to
On Thu, 09 Nov 2000 13:57:35 GMT Tom Henderson <tomhen...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>Not to get into a sermon, or start a huge off-topic thread, but there is
>incredible historical evidence for the existence of Jesus, and the
>validity of the Bible. So, to answer your question, there are people
>that take the Jesus stuff seriously, and with good reason.

This is literally true. ("Incredible" means "not believable" if you
follow the etymology.) Define "validity".
--
Carl Fink ca...@dm.net
Manager, Dueling Modems Computer Forum
<http://dm.net>

Tom Henderson

unread,
Nov 9, 2000, 10:38:09 PM11/9/00
to
That's not true. There is evidence from sources hostile to
Christianity that Jesus came back from the dead (Josephus, to name
one). Please, before making claims about Jesus, at least do some
reading about him.

In article <onml0toe4q2r1k67d...@4ax.com>,


paul...@bigfoot.com wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Nov 2000 16:01:51 GMT, gzyw...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> >In article <rvrj0t03jg5c3cpc6...@4ax.com>,
> > paul...@bigfoot.com wrote:
> >> No one takes the Jesus stuff deadly seriously these days do they?
> >>
> >> do they?
> >>
> >
> >Only those of us who know him.
> >
> >Greg Zywicki
> >
> >

> >Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> >Before you buy.
>

> You don't know him, he's been dead for nearly 2000 years
>

gzyw...@my-deja.com

unread,
Nov 10, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/10/00
to
In article <onml0toe4q2r1k67d...@4ax.com>,
paul...@bigfoot.com wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Nov 2000 16:01:51 GMT, gzyw...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> >In article <rvrj0t03jg5c3cpc6...@4ax.com>,
> > paul...@bigfoot.com wrote:
> >> No one takes the Jesus stuff deadly seriously these days do they?
> >>
> >> do they?
> >>
> >
> >Only those of us who know him.
> >
> >Greg Zywicki
> >
> You don't know him, he's been dead for nearly 2000 years
>
Apparently you are unfamiliar with the tennents of my faith.

gzyw...@my-deja.com

unread,
Nov 10, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/10/00
to
In article <8uejrv$v4$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,

jonn...@my-deja.com wrote:
> The majority of religious people in this country are either Chirstians
> or Jews(I think jews are the second most),

Could be Islam at this point, I'm not sure.

> yet I've never seen or heard
> of anybody complaining about Zauriel(or for that matter Preacher).

I did raise a complaint about Zauriel on DCU-L (I think) a few years
back, but it was mostly, "Good story. Doesn't resemble heaven in any
way, but a pretty good story nonetheless. Preacher - why bother? The
religion in that book had only a fleeting resemblence to any of the big
three monotheisms.

> Now
> that I think about it, I don't recall any buddist or hindu stories in
> comics.
>
> > Paul O'Brien
>

You missed DeMatais in the 80's then. There was a time when every one
of his stories veered into obscure hinduism. Dr. Fate was the best
example. Real shame too, because it overwhelmed what had started out as
a very engaging book.

TK-421

unread,
Nov 10, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/10/00
to
On Fri, 10 Nov 2000 15:30:15 GMT, gzyw...@my-deja.com wrote:

>In article <onml0toe4q2r1k67d...@4ax.com>,
> paul...@bigfoot.com wrote:
>> On Thu, 09 Nov 2000 16:01:51 GMT, gzyw...@my-deja.com wrote:
>>
>> >In article <rvrj0t03jg5c3cpc6...@4ax.com>,
>> > paul...@bigfoot.com wrote:
>> >> No one takes the Jesus stuff deadly seriously these days do they?
>> >>
>> >> do they?
>> >>
>> >
>> >Only those of us who know him.
>> >
>> >Greg Zywicki
>> >
>> You don't know him, he's been dead for nearly 2000 years
>>
>Apparently you are unfamiliar with the tennents of my faith.
>

>Greg Zywicki
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.


Having fath is something does not equate to knowing it, even if you
would like it to be so

Todd Luck

unread,
Nov 10, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/10/00
to
In article <8uc8gb$388$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,

jonn...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Can somebody explain something that has been bugging me for a long
> time? What is the deal with religion in comics over the past 60 years
> or so? I guess it all started in the golden age with the debut of
> Wonder Woman, a modern day amazon. Then came the Specter, who's
> supposed to be a spirit of God. Now it seems that in comics all
> religions are real(yes I know that the OHOTMU says that there is no
one
> ominipoten deity but just a bunch of pantheons but still). Marvel has
> interactions with the olympians and the asgardians all the time. DC
has
> Zauriel taking everybody into Heaven during "Day of Judgement" with WW
> praying to the olympians the whole time, and they also had Aztec
> getting his powers from an ancient aztec diety. This concept is highly
> illogical. How do writers get away with these stories without causing
> confussion. Am I the only one who notices these things, or are there
> just that many atheists out there?
>
In the DCU (currently) all the gods and divine beings are different
aspects of one grand divine force and all their origin myths are simply
different ways to tell the same story. Humans in the DCU percieve the
divine differently depending on their beliefs. This is actually a
belief shared by some sects of Hinduism and a few other religions, not
just a fix thought up by some writer.

--
Todd Luck
Come laugh your ass off at my online comics!
http://digital.uncg.edu/webpages/undergrads/toddluck/Toddpages
/index.html
Home of College Follies comics!

jonn...@my-deja.com

unread,
Nov 10, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/10/00
to
In article <4LcCdjA6...@esoterica.demon.co.uk>,

Paul O'Brien <pa...@esoterica.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <8uejvi$10j$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, jonn...@my-deja.com writes
> >
> >Go to a church some Sunday. You'll find out then.
>
> I'd love to, but I spend my Sundays raping goats and sacrificing
> children. It's a hard life, but pleasurable.

Oh for crying out loud! Why can't people be mature during threads like
this?

> Paul O'Brien
> THE X-AXIS REVIEWS - http://www.esoterica.demon.co.uk
>
> From the relatively fashionable west end of Glasgow.
>

gzyw...@my-deja.com

unread,
Nov 10, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/10/00
to
In article <up7o0t85acbh5lkg6...@4ax.com>,

paul...@bigfoot.com wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Nov 2000 15:30:15 GMT, gzyw...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> >In article <onml0toe4q2r1k67d...@4ax.com>,
> > paul...@bigfoot.com wrote:
> >> On Thu, 09 Nov 2000 16:01:51 GMT, gzyw...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article <rvrj0t03jg5c3cpc6...@4ax.com>,
> >> > paul...@bigfoot.com wrote:
> >> >> No one takes the Jesus stuff deadly seriously these days do
they?
> >> >>
> >> >> do they?
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >Only those of us who know him.
> >> >
> >> >Greg Zywicki
> >> >
> >> You don't know him, he's been dead for nearly 2000 years
> >>
> >Apparently you are unfamiliar with the tennents of my faith.
> >
> >Greg Zywicki
> >
> >
> >Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> >Before you buy.
>
> Having fath is something does not equate to knowing it, even if you
> would like it to be so
>
Okay semantic cop, apparently you're unfamiliar with the tennents of my
religion then.

Sheesh.

Greg Zywicki

Matt Adler

unread,
Nov 10, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/10/00
to
<jonn...@my-deja.com> wrote:

> Oh for crying out loud! Why can't people be mature during threads like
> this?

Because threads like this have no place in this newsgroup?

TK-421

unread,
Nov 10, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/10/00
to

>>
>> Having fath is something does not equate to knowing it, even if you
>> would like it to be so
>>
>Okay semantic cop, apparently you're unfamiliar with the tennents of my
>religion then.
>
>Sheesh.
>
>Greg Zywicki
>
>


This doesn't make it any different. Your supposedly knowing Jesus is
simply an act of faith based on your religion. You do not actaully
know him in any sort of literal sense. The fact remains that it has
been nearly 2000 years since the historical figure that is now known
as Jesus Christ walked the Earth and anyone was able to actually know
him

Kevin J. Maroney

unread,
Nov 10, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/10/00
to
gzyw...@my-deja.com wrote:

>You missed DeMatais in the 80's then. There was a time when every one
>of his stories veered into obscure hinduism.

"deMatteis". And what deMatteis believes, and what his stories often
concern, isn't Hindu per se; it's the religion of Meher Baba, which is
an eccumenical blend of religions with large doses of both Hindu and
Christianity.

--
Kevin J. Maroney | Unplugged Games | kmar...@ungames.com
"Thank you for your cooperation, Mr. Maroney. You are free
to leave."--Hyperion, _Squadron Supreme_ (by Mark Gruenwald)

Jim Kinsey

unread,
Nov 10, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/10/00
to
TK-421 <paul...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:m2oo0t8j78slrgel1...@4ax.com...

Think of it as a sort of metaphor then - like when you "find" Jesus - you
don't literally go up into your Grandad's loft one day, look behind a chest
and see Jesus lying there - "Hey! I found Jesus!" (although I can't help but
think of South Park the movie when I hear this phrase now). Once you've
"found" him, you don't hang out with him and exchange phone calls - but you
can lay a much better claim to knowing him than those who haven't.

In other words: Don't try and argue with religion over semantics, you'll get
nowhere. As has been pointed out elsewhere the Bible has been translated and
rewritten so many times, to argue over the arrangement of the words would be
futile. Start with things like Dinosaur bones, the age of the universe,
evolution. But be careful to do your research - these guys can be sharp.

Jim

--
"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend, inside a dog it's too dark
too read"
--Groucho Marx


Jim Kinsey

unread,
Nov 10, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/10/00
to
Dodds <pdne...@cableinet.co.uk> wrote

> Talking of raping animals...
> i read in the paper a few weeks back about some strange laws. One of
> them was that, in some Islamic countries (can't remember which ones),
> there is a law that if a man has sexual intercourse with a lamb, it is
> illegal if he eats it's flesh. Now, is it just me, or is there
> something wrong with that law

Maybe it's a mis-translation and is referring to oral sex...?

Have you ever been to www.dumblaws.com? They have loads of things like this
listed. Was recently much-quoted in Sam & Twitch.

Paul O'Brien

unread,
Nov 10, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/10/00
to
In article <8uhhl9$fbr$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, jonn...@my-deja.com writes

>>
>> I'd love to, but I spend my Sundays raping goats and sacrificing
>> children. It's a hard life, but pleasurable.
>
>Oh for crying out loud! Why can't people be mature during threads like
>this?

Ah, well I don't have to worry about my immortal soul. It's not
really an issue for us lawyers.

Alpha

unread,
Nov 11, 2000, 3:00:34 PM11/11/00
to
One thing that can allow most of these religious characters to co-exist is
that traditionally they did not create the universe. The Norse, Olympian
and numerous other pantheons inherited their positions from previous
beings. In Norse mythology for instance it is supposedly pre-ordained that
most of them will die in Ragnarok and his son Magni will become the new
head of the gods just as Odin had inherited that position eons ago. This
allows them to exist in a Judeo-Christian universe fairly easily by merely
being beings of incredible power rather than being the
progenitors/controllers of the universe itself. I've tended to notice that
it is those non conflicting pantheons that have been used predominantly in
Comics.

Historically perceptions of religions and the religions themselves change
over time. Ancient depiction's of the Hebrew god depicted a mountain god
(thunder god) with both horns and snakes in the imagery apparently. As
with many religions of the time he was a wrathful violent god and
sacrifices both human and animal were performed to him. As time changed so
did the depiction and the perceived nature of him. The snakes, horns,
violence and sacrifices became the look and nature of god's enemy and God
was portrayed as a far more compassionate entity. Further splits in that
core religion resulted in the various Jewish sects, the Christian religion
and the Muslim sects many of whom have conflicting views on who or what God
is and what he wants. Does that mean that God changed or merely the
perceptions we wanted to put upon him/her changed. In all likelihood God
is probably nothing like anything we have imagined and we'll all be shocked
and amazed by the afterlife.

Either that or we all go to nothing.... frankly that's a kind of depressing
nihilistic thought so I'll just bank on God being reasonably compassionate
and we'll either have some sort of afterlife or reincarnation depending on
his/her/its wishes.

TK-421

unread,
Nov 11, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/11/00
to
On Fri, 10 Nov 2000 22:52:16 -0000, "Jim Kinsey" <jimk...@beeb.net>
wrote:

> Start with things like Dinosaur bones, the age of the universe,
>evolution. But be careful to do your research - these guys can be sharp.

The thing is I'm not out to disprove anything. But Religious people
often quote the things they believe as facts when they are plainly not
facts and cannot be proved. Just for the record, I am not claiming
that they can be disproved either.

Rami Rautkorpi

unread,
Nov 11, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/11/00
to

"Alpha" <mrx...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3A0DA562...@hotmail.com...

> One thing that can allow most of these religious characters to co-exist is
> that traditionally they did not create the universe. The Norse, Olympian
> and numerous other pantheons inherited their positions from previous
> beings. In Norse mythology for instance it is supposedly pre-ordained
that
> most of them will die in Ragnarok and his son Magni will become the new
> head of the gods just as Odin had inherited that position eons ago. This
> allows them to exist in a Judeo-Christian universe fairly easily by merely
> being beings of incredible power rather than being the
> progenitors/controllers of the universe itself. I've tended to notice
that
> it is those non conflicting pantheons that have been used predominantly in
> Comics.

Depends on how close you look. Odin didn't create all of existence, but he
is responsible, along with his brothers Vili and Ve, for the material world
as we know it. They fashioned the earth from the giant Ymir's body and made
the oceans from his blood. And according to another myth, they also created
the first man and woman from two trees. Didn't leave much to do for the old
"I am", did they?

The reason old pantheons are predominantly used in comics is that pretty
much nobody gives a damn when the actual religious elements are stripped
from the myths, leaving just super-beings with funny beards.

TK-421

unread,
Nov 11, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/11/00
to


So would I

Alpha

unread,
Nov 12, 2000, 9:27:19 PM11/12/00
to

Rami Rautkorpi wrote:

> "Alpha" <mrx...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3A0DA562...@hotmail.com...

> > One thing that can allow most of these religious characters to co-exist is
> > that traditionally they did not create the universe. The Norse, Olympian
> > and numerous other pantheons inherited their positions from previous
> > beings. In Norse mythology for instance it is supposedly pre-ordained
> that
> > most of them will die in Ragnarok and his son Magni will become the new
> > head of the gods just as Odin had inherited that position eons ago. This
> > allows them to exist in a Judeo-Christian universe fairly easily by merely
> > being beings of incredible power rather than being the
> > progenitors/controllers of the universe itself. I've tended to notice
> that
> > it is those non conflicting pantheons that have been used predominantly in
> > Comics.
>

> Depends on how close you look. Odin didn't create all of existence, but he
> is responsible, along with his brothers Vili and Ve, for the material world
> as we know it. They fashioned the earth from the giant Ymir's body and made
> the oceans from his blood. And according to another myth, they also created
> the first man and woman from two trees. Didn't leave much to do for the old
> "I am", did they?
>
> The reason old pantheons are predominantly used in comics is that pretty
> much nobody gives a damn when the actual religious elements are stripped
> from the myths, leaving just super-beings with funny beards.
>
> --
> Rami Rautkorpi
> http://koti.mbnet.fi/ramir
> --
> "If you're so smart
> why can't you see your own head
> without a reflective surface?" -Grant Morrison

Actually that depends on which version of the Norse creation myths you believe.
Another common one has more in common with the Greek gods. They basically
inherited their position from the former god-like beings. There are quite a few
variations of the Norse pantheon depending on which group of people were
worshipping them.

The Marvel version uses the inheriting model. I forget what the previous
god-like beings were called. Maybe someone can remember.

Paul "Duggy" Duggan

unread,
Nov 12, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/12/00
to
On Sun, 12 Nov 2000, Alpha wrote:

> Actually that depends on which version of the Norse creation myths you believe.
> Another common one has more in common with the Greek gods. They basically
> inherited their position from the former god-like beings. There are quite a few
> variations of the Norse pantheon depending on which group of people were
> worshipping them.

In (some versions of) Greek Mythology Chaos created Gaea (the Earth). Their
children inherited. There's still a point of creation.

---
- Dug.
---
Post cost: 55c a word.
(Higher from public phones and mobiles.)
---


Rami Rautkorpi

unread,
Nov 12, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/12/00
to
I wrote about creation in norse mythology, and

"Alpha" <mrx...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3A0F5187...@hotmail.com...

>
> Actually that depends on which version of the Norse creation myths you
believe.
> Another common one has more in common with the Greek gods. They basically
> inherited their position from the former god-like beings. There are quite
a few
> variations of the Norse pantheon depending on which group of people were
> worshipping them.
>
> The Marvel version uses the inheriting model. I forget what the previous
> god-like beings were called. Maybe someone can remember.

Thor and the gang are Aesir (asor in Swedish IIRC), hence Asgard, and the
older gods were Vanir (vanor). Odin and his brothers were actually Vanir, I
believe. And the point still stands, that according to one myth Odin was
responsible for life on Earth, and choosing a different version of the
mythology is analogous to favoring the dogmas of one Christian church over
the other. If there still were people actively worshipping Odin, some of
them would be cross about Stan messing with their religious beliefs.

Robert M. Bienvenu

unread,
Nov 12, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/12/00
to
Paul O'Brien <pa...@esoterica.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>In article <8uc8gb$388$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, jonn...@my-deja.com writes


>>Can somebody explain something that has been bugging me for a long
>>time? What is the deal with religion in comics over the past 60 years
>>or so?
>

>Religions are basically mythic stories and therefore fit rather
>well into a superhero mythos - as long as you're not using one that
>the audience take deadly seriously, in which case they'll be mortally
>offended at the trivialisation of their religious beliefs.
>
Religion in comics is the same as religion in any other media. It's
accepted that use of religious figures or history in a story does not
neccessarily equal validation of that religion.

I doubt that many walked out of Raiders of the Lost Ark, when the
reality of the religious artifact was revealed. I'm sure that
non-Christians can enjoy "The Night Before Christmas", without
offense.

It get's offensive (in comics or anywhere else), when you attempt to
change or explain religious history with non-religious explanation.
(Explaining that the star that guided the wise men was a space ship,
or that your religious founders were actually aliens).

I don't know how many folks still believe in the Norse, Roman or Greek
gods, but I'm guessing that they wouldn't be too thrilled with their
use by comic creators. I guess I'd feel the same way if Captain
Marvel gained his powers by shouting an acronym made up of the names
of the Apostles.

set...@midwest.net

unread,
Nov 12, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/12/00
to
On Sun, 12 Nov 2000 19:24:08 +0200, "Rami Rautkorpi"
<rami.ra...@mbnet.fi> wrote:

>I wrote about creation in norse mythology, and

>"Alpha" <mrx...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

>news:3A0F5187...@hotmail.com...


>>
>> Actually that depends on which version of the Norse creation myths you
>believe.
>> Another common one has more in common with the Greek gods. They basically
>> inherited their position from the former god-like beings. There are quite
>a few
>> variations of the Norse pantheon depending on which group of people were
>> worshipping them.
>>
>> The Marvel version uses the inheriting model. I forget what the previous
>> god-like beings were called. Maybe someone can remember.
>

>Thor and the gang are Aesir (asor in Swedish IIRC), hence Asgard, and the
>older gods were Vanir (vanor). Odin and his brothers were actually Vanir, I
>believe. And the point still stands, that according to one myth Odin was
>responsible for life on Earth, and choosing a different version of the
>mythology is analogous to favoring the dogmas of one Christian church over
>the other. If there still were people actively worshipping Odin, some of

>them would be cross about Stan messing with their religious belief.
Not to sound like I'm trolling or anything....but....there *are* still
people actively worshipping the older pantheons in the pagan
communities of today. (I myself being a Celtic pagan.) In fact,
there's an organized group of people who worship Odin and the like in
today's world, collectively known as the Asatruar, I believe. Pagans
may not be as large a community as Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism,
Buddhism, or Islam, in today's world...but we do exist and actively
worship. And to bring this back a bit more on-topic, I've studied
mythology for years, autodidact that I am, and while Marvel's not
perfect by any means, their version of the Norse gods I find pretty
true to the old tales, at least in spirit.

Seth


Carl Fink

unread,
Nov 12, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/12/00
to
On Sun, 12 Nov 2000 19:24:08 +0200 Rami Rautkorpi <rami.ra...@mbnet.fi> wrote:
>
>Thor and the gang are Aesir (asor in Swedish IIRC), hence Asgard, and the
>older gods were Vanir (vanor). Odin and his brothers were actually Vanir, I
>believe.

Odin, Thor, and some others are Aesir. Freyr and Freya are of the
Vanir. They aren't older than the Aesir, they're a rival tribe that
fought a war with them. As part of the peace treaty Freyr and Freya
join the Aesir as semi-hostages.

Paul "Duggy" Duggan

unread,
Nov 12, 2000, 7:28:43 PM11/12/00
to
On Sun, 12 Nov 2000, Robert M. Bienvenu wrote:
> I don't know how many folks still believe in the Norse, Roman or Greek
> gods, but I'm guessing that they wouldn't be too thrilled with their
> use by comic creators. I guess I'd feel the same way if Captain
> Marvel gained his powers by shouting an acronym made up of the names
> of the Apostles.

What, like Seriphm?

Michael Alan Chary

unread,
Nov 12, 2000, 9:32:45 PM11/12/00
to
In article <slrn90u2e9...@home.nitpicking.com>,

Carl Fink <ca...@dm.net> wrote:
>On Sun, 12 Nov 2000 19:24:08 +0200 Rami Rautkorpi
><rami.ra...@mbnet.fi> wrote:
>>
>>Thor and the gang are Aesir (asor in Swedish IIRC), hence Asgard, and the
>>older gods were Vanir (vanor). Odin and his brothers were actually Vanir, I
>>believe.
>
>Odin, Thor, and some others are Aesir. Freyr and Freya are of the
>Vanir. They aren't older than the Aesir, they're a rival tribe that
>fought a war with them. As part of the peace treaty Freyr and Freya
>join the Aesir as semi-hostages.

They were not hostages. More sort of players to be named later.
--
"Ipsa scientia potestas est." - Roger Bacon

Rami Rautkorpi

unread,
Nov 13, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/13/00
to
<set...@midwest.net> wrote in message
news:3a0f0c68...@news.midwest.net...

> Not to sound like I'm trolling or anything....but....there *are* still
> people actively worshipping the older pantheons in the pagan
> communities of today. (I myself being a Celtic pagan.) In fact,
> there's an organized group of people who worship Odin and the like in
> today's world, collectively known as the Asatruar, I believe. Pagans
> may not be as large a community as Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism,
> Buddhism, or Islam, in today's world...but we do exist and actively
> worship. And to bring this back a bit more on-topic, I've studied
> mythology for years, autodidact that I am, and while Marvel's not
> perfect by any means, their version of the Norse gods I find pretty
> true to the old tales, at least in spirit.

No problem. I was the one whose argument was rather extreme (I hope nowhere
near trollish though?). I pretty much figured there would be _some_ people
in this world still worshipping the old gods, but I didn't think one of them
would pop up to refute my statement right away... Mea culpa.

Rami Rautkorpi

unread,
Nov 13, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/13/00
to

"Carl Fink" <ca...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:slrn90u2e9...@home.nitpicking.com...

> On Sun, 12 Nov 2000 19:24:08 +0200 Rami Rautkorpi
<rami.ra...@mbnet.fi> wrote:
> >
> >Thor and the gang are Aesir (asor in Swedish IIRC), hence Asgard, and the
> >older gods were Vanir (vanor). Odin and his brothers were actually Vanir,
I
> >believe.
>
> Odin, Thor, and some others are Aesir. Freyr and Freya are of the
> Vanir. They aren't older than the Aesir, they're a rival tribe that
> fought a war with them. As part of the peace treaty Freyr and Freya
> join the Aesir as semi-hostages.

Damn, you're right. Umm... nevermind. I'll just shut up now.

gzyw...@my-deja.com

unread,
Nov 13, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/13/00
to
In article <8uhu3a$1kl4$1...@news.beeb.net>,
"Jim Kinsey" <jimk...@beeb.net> wrote:

> In other words: Don't try and argue with religion over semantics,
you'll get
> nowhere. As has been pointed out elsewhere the Bible has been
translated and
> rewritten so many times, to argue over the arrangement of the words
would be
> futile.

As has been pointed out elsewhere, texts exist in the original greek, a
language we have a pretty good handle on in this day and age.
Mistranslation is an uniformed argument. Misdocumentation is a better
one, as the existing documents date from about 60 AD.

>Start with things like Dinosaur bones, the age of the
universe,
> evolution. But be careful to do your research - these guys can be
sharp.
>

> Jim
Yes we can be, especially those of us who aren't literalists, and those
of us now passed on who believe, but also established some of the
methods for dating the age of the planet. I don't dispute age of the
universe, etc, because I don't literally interpret the text to say that
the earth is only six or seven thousand years old. Outside of the
dates, there is nothing in Genesis that is in contradiction with
science.

gzyw...@my-deja.com

unread,
Nov 13, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/13/00
to
In article <tmfq0tsejeqddqb29...@4ax.com>,

paul...@bigfoot.com wrote:
>
> The thing is I'm not out to disprove anything. But Religious people
> often quote the things they believe as facts when they are plainly not
> facts and cannot be proved.
>

You're confusing truths with facts. Unprovable things can be true
(eg, I love my wife.) Believers are usually speaking of what they
consider revealed truths. They can't be proven, only accepted or
rejected. So when I say I "know" Jesus, I can't prove it, but it is a
truth that was revealled to me. You don't have to accept this, but
neither can you point out to me that I'm wrong with any hope of success.

Greg Zywicki
I love comics

gzyw...@my-deja.com

unread,
Nov 13, 2000, 3:00:00 AM11/13/00
to