"Left Behind" series question

[Mike Schilling]

On Wednesday 09 July 2003 18:41 in

In the Year of the Goat, the Great and Powerful Paul Vader declared...

On the advice of several friends, my fiance and I started on the _Left
Behind_ series. I'm in the middle of Book 1, _Left Behind_, and my
fiance is almost through book 3, _Nicolae_. I'm thinking it's a
decent enough book, but I'm finding it a bit... preachy.

This is a book series about the rapture and the end times [1], as
described in the book of revelations. How do you suppose it *wouldn't*

be

preachy?

Stephen King's "The Stand" is about an apocalypse, complete with
God coming down to squash the Devil at the end, but it's not
preachy.

Williams' _Descent Into Hell_ is also, arguably, about the beginning
of the End Times. But although it does have a central character act
as a spokesman for some of Williams' own views, it's hardly preachy.

Philip Farmer's "Toward the Beloved City" is explicitly set during the End
Times. It is not at all preachy.

[Matt Ruff]

Strangely reading the replies to this post makes me wonder about the
average intelligence of this group, I once though slightly higher than
the average for most groups. The Left Behind series is a fictional
interpretation of biblical scripture, as such it will be VERY preachy,

That doesn't necessarily follow. Michael Tolkin's film "The Rapture"
deals with the exact same subject matter, for example, but doesn't come
off as an exercise in evangelism. Neither did the Chris Carter series
"Millennium," or Stephen King's _The Stand_, or Walter J. Miller's
_Canticle For Leibowitz,_ or Nikos Kazantzakis' "The Last Temptation of
Christ," or plenty of other works I could name that take religion
seriously without attempt to prosthelytize the reader.

And no if you are not a christian (or on the edge of christianity) you
will not like the books,

The problem is that even being a Christian is no guarantee that you
won't be bored stiff by them.

-- M. Ruff

[Dorothy J Heydt]

Post by Matt Ruff

Strangely reading the replies to this post makes me wonder about the
average intelligence of this group, I once though slightly higher than
the average for most groups. The Left Behind series is a fictional
interpretation of biblical scripture, as such it will be VERY preachy,

That doesn't necessarily follow. Michael Tolkin's film "The Rapture"
deals with the exact same subject matter, for example, but doesn't come
off as an exercise in evangelism. Neither did the Chris Carter series
"Millennium," or Stephen King's _The Stand_, or Walter J. Miller's
_Canticle For Leibowitz,_ or Nikos Kazantzakis' "The Last Temptation of
Christ," or plenty of other works I could name that take religion
seriously without attempt to prosthelytize the reader.

And no if you are not a christian (or on the edge of christianity) you
will not like the books,

The problem is that even being a Christian is no guarantee that you
won't be bored stiff by them.

This Christian wouldn't touch them with a ten-foot pole, or even
a twelve-foot Bulgarian.

I remember when the film of _TLToC_ came out and various
Christian or Christianoid groups were picketing it, one of the
priests at St. Mary Magdalene's gave a short precis of the plot
and said there was nothing *wrong* with it, it was just dull, and
if you wanted really exciting stuff, read the Gospels.

Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
***@kithrup.com
http://www.kithrup.com/~djheydt

[w***@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu]

Post by Dorothy J Heydt
I remember when the film of _TLToC_ came out and various
Christian or Christianoid groups were picketing it,

I probably would never have gone to see it (I tend
to miss even movies I want to see), but for the fact
that it was picketed.

Alas, when I got to the theatre there were no
pickets. Must have been a prayer break, but it
seemed rather badly timed. Surely you would
want to picket in the half hour before the
film starts?

However, *after* the film had ended, as I was
leaving, the pickets were back (though there were
no more shows that night) and one handed me
a leaflet which said that I should not see the
movie.

Texas fundies. What more can I say?


one of the

Post by Dorothy J Heydt
priests at St. Mary Magdalene's gave a short precis of the plot
and said there was nothing *wrong* with it, it was just dull,

Actually I thought it was a good film.

and

Post by Dorothy J Heydt
if you wanted really exciting stuff, read the Gospels.

The bible wipes out most of the human race on
page three. Greg Bear took 500 pages to do that.
And they say there is no bloat in modern fiction!


William Hyde
EOS Department
Duke University

[Sean O'Hara]

In the Year of the Goat, the Great and Powerful

Post by w***@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu
and

Post by Dorothy J Heydt
if you wanted really exciting stuff, read the Gospels.

The bible wipes out most of the human race on
page three. Greg Bear took 500 pages to do that.
And they say there is no bloat in modern fiction!

Yeah, but then one of the survivors starts waving his wang around
in front of his family. Ugh. I don't see why anyone would think
that's a family book.

[Joseph Michael Bay]

In the Year of the Goat, the Great and Powerful

Post by w***@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu
and

Post by Dorothy J Heydt
if you wanted really exciting stuff, read the Gospels.

The bible wipes out most of the human race on
page three. Greg Bear took 500 pages to do that.
And they say there is no bloat in modern fiction!

Yeah, but then one of the survivors starts waving his wang around
in front of his family. Ugh. I don't see why anyone would think
that's a family book.

Does he have superhuman strength? Wangs are pretty
heavy, even if you're not counting the power supply.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In the Year of the Goat, the Great and Powerful

Post by w***@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu
and

Post by Dorothy J Heydt
if you wanted really exciting stuff, read the Gospels.

The bible wipes out most of the human race on
page three. Greg Bear took 500 pages to do that.
And they say there is no bloat in modern fiction!

Yeah, but then one of the survivors starts waving his wang around
in front of his family. Ugh. I don't see why anyone would think
that's a family book.

Distinguo: he wasn't waving it, he was asleep in his tent and the
covers fell off.

Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
***@kithrup.com
http://www.kithrup.com/~djheydt

[John]

Post by Dorothy J Heydt

In the Year of the Goat, the Great and Powerful

Post by w***@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu
and

Post by Dorothy J Heydt
if you wanted really exciting stuff, read the Gospels.

The bible wipes out most of the human race on
page three. Greg Bear took 500 pages to do that.
And they say there is no bloat in modern fiction!

Yeah, but then one of the survivors starts waving his wang around
in front of his family. Ugh. I don't see why anyone would think
that's a family book.

Distinguo: he wasn't waving it, he was asleep in his tent and the
covers fell off.

"I was just cleaning it, and it went off."

[WareWolf]

Post by Dorothy J Heydt

In the Year of the Goat, the Great and Powerful

Post by w***@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu
and

Post by Dorothy J Heydt
if you wanted really exciting stuff, read the Gospels.

The bible wipes out most of the human race on
page three. Greg Bear took 500 pages to do that.
And they say there is no bloat in modern fiction!

Yeah, but then one of the survivors starts waving his wang around
in front of his family. Ugh. I don't see why anyone would think
that's a family book.

Distinguo: he wasn't waving it, he was asleep in his tent and the
covers fell off.

He was blind drunk at the time. Not that anyone was surprised. Sailors, you
know.

Dusty


--


This week's column: Sodomy, The Supremes, and the Two Amigos
http://dusty.booksnbytes.com/columns/2003/2003_0706.html

[Walter Bushell]

Post by WareWolf

Post by Dorothy J Heydt

In the Year of the Goat, the Great and Powerful

Post by w***@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu
and

Post by Dorothy J Heydt
if you wanted really exciting stuff, read the Gospels.

The bible wipes out most of the human race on
page three. Greg Bear took 500 pages to do that.
And they say there is no bloat in modern fiction!

Yeah, but then one of the survivors starts waving his wang around
in front of his family. Ugh. I don't see why anyone would think
that's a family book.

Distinguo: he wasn't waving it, he was asleep in his tent and the
covers fell off.

He was blind drunk at the time. Not that anyone was surprised. Sailors, you
know.
Dusty

And some people cannot resist the temptation to Ham it up.

[Mike Swaim]

Post by w***@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu

Post by Dorothy J Heydt
I remember when the film of _TLToC_ came out and various
Christian or Christianoid groups were picketing it,

However, *after* the film had ended, as I was
leaving, the pickets were back (though there were
no more shows that night) and one handed me
a leaflet which said that I should not see the
movie.
Texas fundies. What more can I say?

To the best of my knowledge, the film's never been shown in a theater in
Alabama. I'd be suprised if you could even rent it there.

--
Mike Swaim
***@hal-pc.org
Disclaimer: I sometimes lie.
http://www.hal-pc.org/~swaim

[Eric D. Berge]

On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 04:42:48 GMT, Matt Ruff

Post by Matt Ruff

Strangely reading the replies to this post makes me wonder about the
average intelligence of this group, I once though slightly higher than
the average for most groups. The Left Behind series is a fictional
interpretation of biblical scripture, as such it will be VERY preachy,

That doesn't necessarily follow. Michael Tolkin's film "The Rapture"
deals with the exact same subject matter, for example, but doesn't come
off as an exercise in evangelism.

...to you.

I saw the movie in the theater when it came out; when the lights came
up after the credits, a young couple in the front row stood up, turned
around to face the rest of the remaining audience, and said (in
unison) "Doesn't it make you want to get Saved?".

[Eric D. Berge]

Post by Eric D. Berge
...to you.
I saw the movie in the theater when it came out; when the lights came
up after the credits, a young couple in the front row stood up, turned
around to face the rest of the remaining audience, and said (in
unison) "Doesn't it make you want to get Saved?".

I'm picturing the kids from Sinfest here (sinfest.com, online comic) :-)

??? Sinfest.com appears to be a p*rn search site.

[Ross TenEyck]

Post by Eric D. Berge

I'm picturing the kids from Sinfest here (sinfest.com, online comic) :-)

??? Sinfest.com appears to be a p*rn search site.

Yeah, it does, doesn't it? Try www.sinfest.net, which is in fact
a quite good webcomic.

--
================== http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~teneyck ==================
Ross TenEyck Seattle, WA \ Light, kindled in the furnace of hydrogen;
***@alumni.caltech.edu \ like smoke, sunlight carries the hot-metal
Are wa yume? Soretomo maboroshi? \ tang of Creation's forge.

[Dana Crom]

Post by Eric D. Berge

Post by Eric D. Berge
...to you.
I saw the movie in the theater when it came out; when the lights came
up after the credits, a young couple in the front row stood up, turned
around to face the rest of the remaining audience, and said (in
unison) "Doesn't it make you want to get Saved?".

I'm picturing the kids from Sinfest here (sinfest.com, online comic) :-)

??? Sinfest.com appears to be a p*rn search site.

Try www.sinfest.net.

Amusingly, the fellow who first recommended it to me is a devout (on quiet,
personal level - the antithesis of your theater yahoos) Christian. He also
steered me to Goats (www.goats.com), another strip that sometimes goes
after the more publically self-righteous religious fringe.

[Keith Morrison]

I find it highly amusing to watch Jack van Impe become giddy at
the thought of the rapture and tribulation. It's like he has
an orgasm everytime he finds something that "fits" Revelation.
Then again, it's kinda scarey.

Long predated by the old fart (now dead) who headed the Worldwide
Church of God. My grandfather was into it (even bought many of
the books). Great alternate history. Of course, they were supposed
to be discussing current events...

[Sean O'Hara]

In the Year of the Goat, the Great and Powerful Keith Morrison
declared...

Post by Keith Morrison

I find it highly amusing to watch Jack van Impe become giddy at
the thought of the rapture and tribulation. It's like he has
an orgasm everytime he finds something that "fits" Revelation.
Then again, it's kinda scarey.

Long predated by the old fart (now dead) who headed the Worldwide
Church of God. My grandfather was into it (even bought many of
the books). Great alternate history. Of course, they were supposed
to be discussing current events...

I have a book that came out right before the First Gulf War
claiming it was the start of the apocalypse. Of cousre, that
was based upon the prophesies of Nostradamus not the Bible, but
the two are equally accurate in predicting the future.

[Lee Ann Rucker]

Perhaps
continuous accordion music, occasionally interrupted by electric bass
solos.

It's not the instruments which count.
"The Hells are alive with the sound of Muzak..."
My Hell would have all my favorite folk music -- "improved" by classical
musicians.

Seen the ads for pop "hits" done reggae style? If that's not bad
enough, I think there's a KidBop version of it - same thing, only sung
by kids.

[Karl M Syring]

The Left Behind series is an attempt to novelize the book of Revelation in
the Holy Bible (Christian). Revelation has always been a book that grabs
the imagination of the scifi fan because many scifi like elements are in it.
Angels sounding trumphets that release plagues, giant locusts, the four
horsemen, etc.
I've read the first 5 of the books. I like seeing the
fictionalization/expansion of some of the bible events, like the two
prophets, but I find the relationship and general writing very ameaturish.
I give the books I've read so far ** out of five stars for entertainment
value.
If the books seem preachy to you, which I'm assuming you mean they convey
the message of the bible that unless you accept Jesus Christ as your Lord
and personal savior and repent of your sins you will die and go to hell.
And if you do accept Jesus Christ as your savior and Lord, repent of your
sins, you will have eternal life with Him in Heaven. Then yes they are
preachy throughout the series as the bible is preachy.
I personally beleive it is truth.

Lack of education, mostly; Blame your parents.

Karl M. Syring

[John]

Post by Karl M Syring

The Left Behind series is an attempt to novelize the book of

Revelation

in

Post by Karl M Syring

the Holy Bible (Christian). Revelation has always been a book that

grabs

Post by Karl M Syring

the imagination of the scifi fan because many scifi like elements are

in

it.

Post by Karl M Syring

Angels sounding trumphets that release plagues, giant locusts, the four
horsemen, etc.
I've read the first 5 of the books. I like seeing the
fictionalization/expansion of some of the bible events, like the two
prophets, but I find the relationship and general writing very

ameaturish.

Post by Karl M Syring

I give the books I've read so far ** out of five stars for

entertainment

Post by Karl M Syring

value.
If the books seem preachy to you, which I'm assuming you mean they

convey

Post by Karl M Syring

the message of the bible that unless you accept Jesus Christ as your

Lord

Post by Karl M Syring

and personal savior and repent of your sins you will die and go to hell.
And if you do accept Jesus Christ as your savior and Lord, repent of

your

Post by Karl M Syring

sins, you will have eternal life with Him in Heaven. Then yes they are
preachy throughout the series as the bible is preachy.
I personally beleive it is truth.

Lack of education, mostly; Blame your parents.

My parents taught me to be "open minded" and consider all opinions before
wisely choosing. Can you say the same?

Do you seriously think you would be Christian if your parents had been
raised in another faith?

[Dorothy J Heydt]

Post by John
Do you seriously think you would be Christian if your parents had been
raised in another faith?

I dunno about him. My parents were atheists (you can call that a
faith or not as you choose). I'm a Christian. My parents were
annoyed.

Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
***@kithrup.com
http://www.kithrup.com/~djheydt

[WareWolf]

Post by Dorothy J Heydt

Post by John
Do you seriously think you would be Christian if your parents had been
raised in another faith?

I dunno about him. My parents were atheists (you can call that a
faith or not as you choose). I'm a Christian. My parents were
annoyed.

I went through a fundamentalist Christian phase at 12 or so, mainly to annoy
my parents. Now I'm a Van Goghist.

Dusty


--


This week's column: Sodomy, The Supremes, and the Two Amigos
http://dusty.booksnbytes.com/columns/2003/2003_0706.html

[Bill Snyder]

Post by WareWolf

Post by Dorothy J Heydt

Post by John
Do you seriously think you would be Christian if your parents had been
raised in another faith?

I dunno about him. My parents were atheists (you can call that a
faith or not as you choose). I'm a Christian. My parents were
annoyed.

I went through a fundamentalist Christian phase at 12 or so, mainly to annoy
my parents. Now I'm a Van Goghist.

So when you say that you have God's ear, you're speaking literally?

[Dorothy J Heydt]

Post by WareWolf
I went through a fundamentalist Christian phase at 12 or so, mainly to annoy
my parents. Now I'm a Van Goghist.

You mean, you want to be a Protestant minister but they won't
have you so you paint instead????

Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
***@kithrup.com
http://www.kithrup.com/~djheydt

[WareWolf]

Post by Dorothy J Heydt

Post by WareWolf
I went through a fundamentalist Christian phase at 12 or so, mainly to annoy
my parents. Now I'm a Van Goghist.

You mean, you want to be a Protestant minister but they won't
have you so you paint instead????

<g>

From a letter VG wrote to his brother Theo (quoted in "The Van Gogh Blues: A
Creative Person's Guide Through Depression" by Robert Maisel, PhD) :

"That God of the clergymen, He is for me as dead as a doornail. But am I an
atheist for all that? The clergymen consider me such--be it so; but still
there is something mysterious in life. Now call that God, or human nature,
or whatever you like, but there is something I cannot define systematically,
though it is very much alive and very real, that is God, or as good as God."

I love that quote.

Interesting book, although there are times where one feels that if Maisel
uses the word "meaning" one more time, one is gonna hurl.

Dusty (and no, I don't paint, I write)


--


This week's column: Sodomy, The Supremes, and the Two Amigos
http://dusty.booksnbytes.com/columns/2003/2003_0706.html

[Dreamer]

Post by Dorothy J Heydt

Post by John
Do you seriously think you would be Christian if your parents had been
raised in another faith?

I dunno about him. My parents were atheists (you can call that a
faith or not as you choose). I'm a Christian. My parents were
annoyed.

It's a faith. Agnosticism isn't. Saying you know the answer and the answer
is "no" when you've not got any more proof than the people who claim the
answer is "yes" is just as much an act of faith as saying the answer is
"yes."

I'm a member of the First Church of Discordianism, Agnostic. We hold that it
seems like the universe is the sort of place where *somebody's* been
cheating the odds, but we haven't got any idea who, or whether we're just
imagining things again.

D

[Aaron Brezenski]

Post by Dreamer

Post by Dorothy J Heydt

Post by John
Do you seriously think you would be Christian if your parents had been
raised in another faith?

I dunno about him. My parents were atheists (you can call that a
faith or not as you choose). I'm a Christian. My parents were
annoyed.

It's a faith. Agnosticism isn't. Saying you know the answer and the answer
is "no" when you've not got any more proof than the people who claim the
answer is "yes" is just as much an act of faith as saying the answer is
"yes."

This comes up a lot. Strong atheism ("I believe there is no god") is a faith,
i.e. a belief without proof. Weak atheism ("I don't believe there is a god")
is not a faith: it's an absence of belief.

[Robert Sneddon]

Post by Aaron Brezenski
This comes up a lot. Strong atheism ("I believe there is no god") is a faith,
i.e. a belief without proof. Weak atheism ("I don't believe there is a god")
is not a faith: it's an absence of belief.

Religious-faith believers have a hard job understanding it is possible
to not believe at all. There may be an element of proselytization in
their thinking; if the so-called atheist believes there is no God, then
perhaps they can be converted to believe there *is* a God and so they
can be saved.

[Dreamer]

Post by Aaron Brezenski

Post by Dreamer

Post by Dorothy J Heydt

Post by John
Do you seriously think you would be Christian if your parents had been
raised in another faith?

I dunno about him. My parents were atheists (you can call that a
faith or not as you choose). I'm a Christian. My parents were
annoyed.

It's a faith. Agnosticism isn't. Saying you know the answer and the answer
is "no" when you've not got any more proof than the people who claim the
answer is "yes" is just as much an act of faith as saying the answer is
"yes."

This comes up a lot. Strong atheism ("I believe there is no god") is a faith,
i.e. a belief without proof. Weak atheism ("I don't believe there is a god")
is not a faith: it's an absence of belief.

Why be inconsistent when there is a perfectly good word to describe what you
mean?

"Atheism." No gods. Or, if you like references:

a·the·ism
Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
The doctrine that there is no God or gods.
Godlessness; immorality.

[French athéisme , from athée ,atheist , from Greek atheos ,godless  : a-
,without ; see a- 1+theos ,god ; see dh s- in Indo-European Roots.]


Source :The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth
Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.


"Agnosticism." Don't know, haven't seen any evidence either way, won't take
sides unless and until I see some. Or, references again:

ag·nos·ti·cism
The doctrine that certainty about first principles or absolute truth is
unattainable and that only perceptual phenomena are objects of exact
knowledge.
The belief that there can be no proof either that God exists or that God
does not exist.


Source :The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth
Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

Although this one's got a snappy first line:

n. That doctrine which, professing ignorance, neither asserts nor denies.
Specifically: (Theol.) The doctrine that the existence of a personal Deity,
an unseen world, etc., can be neither proved nor disproved, because of the
necessary limits of the human mind (as sometimes charged upon Hamilton and
Mansel), or because of the insufficiency of the evidence furnished by
physical and physical data, to warrant a positive conclusion (as taught by
the school of Herbert Spencer); -- opposed alike dogmatic skepticism and to
dogmatic theism.


Source :Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.

See? Nice and neat. Good at parties. "I'm an atheist." "Oh, you don't
believe in Gods then. Good show. Me neither, feel like suing somebody?"

Your way? Bad at parties. "I'm an atheist." "Oh, the strong kind or the weak
kind?" "Well, I have skipped gym the last several weeks." "No, no, I mean,
do you not believe, or do you believe not, or, oh, Hell, skip it. Buzz off."

See? Your way causes needless social friction, and isn't there already
enough of that in the world?

D

[Jim Lovejoy]

Post by Dreamer

Post by Aaron Brezenski

Post by Dreamer

Post by Dorothy J Heydt

Post by John
Do you seriously think you would be Christian if your parents had
been raised in another faith?

I dunno about him. My parents were atheists (you can call that a
faith or not as you choose). I'm a Christian. My parents were
annoyed.

It's a faith. Agnosticism isn't. Saying you know the answer and the
answer is "no" when you've not got any more proof than the people
who claim the answer is "yes" is just as much an act of faith as
saying the answer is "yes."

This comes up a lot. Strong atheism ("I believe there is no god") is
a faith, i.e. a belief without proof. Weak atheism ("I don't believe
there is a god") is not a faith: it's an absence of belief.

Why be inconsistent when there is a perfectly good word to describe
what you mean?
a·the·ism
Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
The doctrine that there is no God or gods.
Godlessness; immorality.
a- ,without ; see a- 1+theos ,god ; see dh s- in Indo-European Roots.]
Source :The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language,
Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
"Agnosticism." Don't know, haven't seen any evidence either way, won't

The reference you show below contradicts your definition of Agnosticism.

The two references put together agree with Aaron.

'Athiest' without belief in God

'Agnostic' believe that there is no 'proof' of the existance of God.

For example, I'm a Christian Agnostic. I believe in the Christian
doctrine, but I admit that there is no proof that the Christian God exists.

Post by Dreamer
ag·nos·ti·cism
The doctrine that certainty about first principles or absolute truth
is unattainable and that only perceptual phenomena are objects of
exact knowledge.
The belief that there can be no proof either that God exists or that
God does not exist.
Source :The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language,
Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
snip<

[Aaron Brezenski]

Post by Dreamer

Post by Aaron Brezenski
This comes up a lot. Strong atheism ("I believe there is no god") is a faith,
i.e. a belief without proof. Weak atheism ("I don't believe there is a god")
is not a faith: it's an absence of belief.

Why be inconsistent when there is a perfectly good word to describe what you
mean?

There's no inconsistency. It's not like I made this shit up. This is common
parlance, at least on the internet (alt.atheism, for starters).
Because, as you show in your dictionary definitions below, in the definition
of "atheist" are inherent two different philosophical choices:

1) >Disbelief in or

2) >denial of the existence of God or gods.

Post by Dreamer
The doctrine that there is no God or gods.

Failure to make the distinction can result in misunderstanding.

Post by Dreamer
"Agnosticism." Don't know, haven't seen any evidence either way, won't take

That's not the definition of agnosticism at all, by your own cite.

Post by Dreamer
The doctrine that certainty about first principles or absolute truth is
unattainable and that only perceptual phenomena are objects of exact
knowledge.
The belief that there can be no proof either that God exists or that God
does not exist.

Agnostics believe there can *be* no proof of the existence of god. Which
is decidedly not what I think.

Post by Dreamer
n. That doctrine which, professing ignorance, neither asserts nor denies.
Specifically: (Theol.) The doctrine that the existence of a personal Deity,
an unseen world, etc., can be neither proved nor disproved, because of the
necessary limits of the human mind (as sometimes charged upon Hamilton and
Mansel), or because of the insufficiency of the evidence furnished by
physical and physical data, to warrant a positive conclusion (as taught by
the school of Herbert Spencer); -- opposed alike dogmatic skepticism and to
dogmatic theism.

The "insufficient evidence" bit fits me, but it's not the original definition
of agnosticism, by any means. This is a definition which has

Post by Dreamer
See? Nice and neat. Good at parties. "I'm an atheist." "Oh, you don't
believe in Gods then. Good show. Me neither, feel like suing somebody?"

It's not that simple, or the distinction wouldn't need to be made.

Post by Dreamer
Your way? Bad at parties. "I'm an atheist." "Oh, the strong kind or the weak
kind?" "Well, I have skipped gym the last several weeks." "No, no, I mean,
do you not believe, or do you believe not, or, oh, Hell, skip it. Buzz off."
See? Your way causes needless social friction, and isn't there already
enough of that in the world?

Oddly enough, I'm usually not discussing religion or a lack thereof at
parties. I save that for the after-party, when everyone's already drunk and
the arguments are much funnier.

[Aaron Brezenski]

Post by Dreamer

Post by Aaron Brezenski
This comes up a lot. Strong atheism ("I believe there is no god") is a faith,
i.e. a belief without proof. Weak atheism ("I don't believe there is a god")
is not a faith: it's an absence of belief.

Why be inconsistent when there is a perfectly good word to describe what you
mean?

There's no inconsistency. It's not like I made this shit up. This is common
parlance, at least on the internet (alt.atheism, for starters).
Because, as you show in your dictionary definitions below, in the definition
of "atheist" are inherent two different philosophical choices:

1) >Disbelief in or

2) >denial of the existence of God or gods.

Post by Dreamer
The doctrine that there is no God or gods.

Failure to make the distinction can result in misunderstanding.

Post by Dreamer
"Agnosticism." Don't know, haven't seen any evidence either way, won't take

That's not the definition of agnosticism at all, by your own cite.

Post by Dreamer
The doctrine that certainty about first principles or absolute truth is
unattainable and that only perceptual phenomena are objects of exact
knowledge.
The belief that there can be no proof either that God exists or that God
does not exist.

Agnostics believe there can *be* no proof of the existence of god. Which
is decidedly not what I think.

Post by Dreamer
n. That doctrine which, professing ignorance, neither asserts nor denies.
Specifically: (Theol.) The doctrine that the existence of a personal Deity,
an unseen world, etc., can be neither proved nor disproved, because of the
necessary limits of the human mind (as sometimes charged upon Hamilton and
Mansel), or because of the insufficiency of the evidence furnished by
physical and physical data, to warrant a positive conclusion (as taught by
the school of Herbert Spencer); -- opposed alike dogmatic skepticism and to
dogmatic theism.

The "insufficient evidence" bit fits me, but it's not the original definition
of agnosticism, by any means. There's significant overlap between atheism
and agnositicism when you use this definition, but since this too is a catch-all
which covers both the "I don't think you can prove God's existence or lack
thereof" and "I don't think there's enough evidence to prove either way"
conditions, you still have to make the distinction which type you are.

Post by Dreamer
See? Nice and neat. Good at parties. "I'm an atheist." "Oh, you don't
believe in Gods then. Good show. Me neither, feel like suing somebody?"

It's not that simple, or the distinction wouldn't need to be made.

Post by Dreamer
Your way? Bad at parties. "I'm an atheist." "Oh, the strong kind or the weak
kind?" "Well, I have skipped gym the last several weeks." "No, no, I mean,
do you not believe, or do you believe not, or, oh, Hell, skip it. Buzz off."
See? Your way causes needless social friction, and isn't there already
enough of that in the world?

Oddly enough, I'm usually not discussing religion or a lack thereof at
parties. I save that for the after-party, when everyone's already drunk and
the arguments are much funnier.

[W. Citoan]

Post by John
Do you seriously think you would be Christian if your parents had been
raised in another faith?

I know a number of people who are and whose parents weren't...

- W. Citoan

[The Other Kim]

Post by W. Citoan

Post by John
Do you seriously think you would be Christian if your parents had been
raised in another faith?

I know a number of people who are and whose parents weren't...

I don't know anyone who is Christian whose parents aren't also, and I
know quite a few former Christians who are now pagans of many different
paths.

The Other Kim

[Karl M Syring]

Post by John

Post by Karl M Syring
Lack of education, mostly; Blame your parents.

My parents taught me to be "open minded" and consider all opinions before
wisely choosing. Can you say the same?

Do you seriously think you would be Christian if your parents had been
raised in another faith?

That LBH stuff is pure heresy. Burn those responsible at the stake.

Karl M. Syring

[Mark 'Kamikaze' Hughes]

Post by Karl M Syring

The Left Behind series is an attempt to novelize the book of Revelation

[...]

Post by Karl M Syring

I personally beleive it is truth.

Lack of education, mostly; Blame your parents.

My parents taught me to be "open minded" and consider all opinions before
wisely choosing. Can you say the same?

"I am sick of hippies trying to tell me that someone's Opinion
can't be wrong because it's thier OPINION. That's bullshit,
plenty of Opinions are wrong. Hey, it's my OPINION that dogs
have eight legs and make a sound like a car horn every time
they take a piss. If I told you that, would you say, "Okay Gabe
I respect your opinion, maybe they do have eight legs." or
would you call me an idiot? Yeah, that's what I thought."
-Gabe in Penny Arcade
<http://www.penny-arcade.com/news.php3?date=2003-03-21>

You chose (to whatever extent your parental brainwashing didn't force)
to be part of a cult of murder, superstition, ritual cannibalism and
vampirism, praying before a torture device, and willful ignorance.

Some of us chose more wisely than that.

[Craig Richardson]

On Tue, 8 Jul 2003 16:18:13 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Plotkin

Strangely reading the replies to this post makes me wonder about the
average intelligence of this group, I once though slightly higher than
the average for most groups. The Left Behind series is a fictional
interpretation of biblical scripture, as such it will be VERY preachy,
it is meant to be. The story is meant to be overshadowed by the
references to scripture.

What on this newsgroup do you perceive to be unintelligent?
The unstated assumption that stories are better when they're not
overshadowed by preaching? I'll state it if you like, and stand by it.

I first met people with this syndrome in college - "I'm intelligent,
so if someone disagrees with me, they must not be intelligent".
Hopefully, those people later realized the real world is in shades of
grey. It's beyond hope that they realized that the person across the
table might be every bit as smart as them, and if there is
disagreement, it means that tjeir opinion might be the one that has a
hole - of course, it might not, but it's amazing how many people
adjust the facts to fit their opinion, as opposed to the right way
'round.

--Craig

[GCarr]

The Left Behind series is an attempt to novelize the book of Revelation in
the Holy Bible (Christian). Revelation has always been a book that grabs
the imagination of the scifi fan because many scifi like elements are in

it.

Angels sounding trumphets that release plagues, giant locusts, the four
horsemen, etc.
I've read the first 5 of the books. I like seeing the
fictionalization/expansion of some of the bible events, like the two
prophets, but I find the relationship and general writing very ameaturish.
I give the books I've read so far ** out of five stars for entertainment
value.
If the books seem preachy to you, which I'm assuming you mean they convey
the message of the bible that unless you accept Jesus Christ as your Lord
and personal savior and repent of your sins you will die and go to hell.
And if you do accept Jesus Christ as your savior and Lord, repent of your
sins, you will have eternal life with Him in Heaven. Then yes they are
preachy throughout the series as the bible is preachy.
I personally beleive it is truth.

Ah, you *do* know that Jesus clearly stated that the Second Coming would
occur within the lifetime of some of those who personally (ie in Real Life)
knew him didn't you? Strangely enough I don't recall that it ever actually
happened...

Personally I think that C.S. Lewis's _Last Battle_ is a *much* better
'Revelation' story. Heck, the whole _Chronicles of Narnia_ are better then
_Left Behind_. The messages are clear, but they aren't at all preachy. Even
this atheist enjoys them.

Still, my favorite Revelation-based book is _Good Omens_ and my favorite
"Fall of Satan" book is _To Reign in Hell_ Warning: don't read these if you
take your religion too seriously.

[pv+ (Paul Vader)]

Post by GCarr
Ah, you *do* know that Jesus clearly stated that the Second Coming would
occur within the lifetime of some of those who personally (ie in Real Life)
knew him didn't you? Strangely enough I don't recall that it ever actually
happened...

And Paul (the apostle, I mean) seemed to be dropping some pretty solid
hints who the antichrist was supposed to be, and it was someone alive in
his time (Emperor Nero of Rome, IIRC). *

[GCarr]

Post by pv+ (Paul Vader)

Post by GCarr
Ah, you *do* know that Jesus clearly stated that the Second Coming would
occur within the lifetime of some of those who personally (ie in Real Life)
knew him didn't you? Strangely enough I don't recall that it ever actually
happened...

And Paul (the apostle, I mean) seemed to be dropping some pretty solid
hints who the antichrist was supposed to be, and it was someone alive in
his time (Emperor Nero of Rome, IIRC). *

Really? I didn't know that, but it doesn't surprise me. IIRC Nero was not
very tolerant toward Jews OR Christians. He was crazier then a sack-full of
weasels too.

Gloria

[The Cardassian Scot]

Post by GCarr

Post by pv+ (Paul Vader)

Post by GCarr
Ah, you *do* know that Jesus clearly stated that the Second Coming would
occur within the lifetime of some of those who personally (ie in Real

Life)

Post by pv+ (Paul Vader)

Post by GCarr
knew him didn't you? Strangely enough I don't recall that it ever

actually

Post by pv+ (Paul Vader)

Post by GCarr
happened...

And Paul (the apostle, I mean) seemed to be dropping some pretty solid
hints who the antichrist was supposed to be, and it was someone alive in
his time (Emperor Nero of Rome, IIRC). *

Really? I didn't know that, but it doesn't surprise me. IIRC Nero was not
very tolerant toward Jews OR Christians. He was crazier then a sack-full of
weasels too.

Not just Paul, if you actually read revelation and have a decent
knowledge of Roman History, you'll find that parts (although not all) of
Revelation refers to Nero.

[The Cardassian Scot]

Post by The Cardassian Scot

Post by GCarr

Post by pv+ (Paul Vader)

Post by GCarr
Ah, you *do* know that Jesus clearly stated that the Second Coming would
occur within the lifetime of some of those who personally (ie in Real

Life)

Post by pv+ (Paul Vader)

Post by GCarr
knew him didn't you? Strangely enough I don't recall that it ever

actually

Post by pv+ (Paul Vader)

Post by GCarr
happened...

And Paul (the apostle, I mean) seemed to be dropping some pretty solid
hints who the antichrist was supposed to be, and it was someone alive in
his time (Emperor Nero of Rome, IIRC). *

Really? I didn't know that, but it doesn't surprise me. IIRC Nero was not
very tolerant toward Jews OR Christians. He was crazier then a sack-full of
weasels too.

Not just Paul, if you actually read revelation and have a decent
knowledge of Roman History, you'll find that parts (although not all) of
Revelation refers to Nero.

Forgot to include, that John pointed out that there was not just one
anti-Christ at the end of time, but many.

David

[Jani Jaakkola]

Gary Larson did. But yeah, an eternity of out-of-tune harp would be
about as bad as one of accordion music (with the exception of musette,
tango, and fado at least).

I don't remember a Larson cartoon with accordions. There was one with
the Devil ushering an older fellow into a room full of pimply-faced kids
with banjos, saying, "Here is your room Maestro."

I think the one Joseph ment is where a demon (or devil? whatever) says to
people queing up to hell: "Wellcome to hell, here is your accordion."

Can't be bothered to look it up on my bookself. Google couldn't.

- Jani

[pv+ (Paul Vader)]

This is a book series about the rapture and the end times [1], as described
in the book of revelations. How do you suppose it *wouldn't* be preachy?

Stephen King's "The Stand" is about an apocalypse, complete with
God coming down to squash the Devil at the end, but it's not
preachy.

That wasn't my point. The Stand doesn't go right out and say that it's
dealing with these themes, and given that there's no rapture in The Stand,
it's hardly literal anyway. The 'left behind' books make no secret of what
they are. *

[Sean O'Hara]

In the Year of the Goat, the Great and Powerful Paul Vader declared...

Post by pv+ (Paul Vader)

This is a book series about the rapture and the end times [1], as described
in the book of revelations. How do you suppose it *wouldn't* be preachy?

Stephen King's "The Stand" is about an apocalypse, complete with
God coming down to squash the Devil at the end, but it's not
preachy.

That wasn't my point. The Stand doesn't go right out and say that it's
dealing with these themes,

There's an old woman who talks to God, a supernatural villain
who embodies evil, and the hand of God literally appears at the
end to smite the bad guys. I don't know how much more blatant
you can get.

Post by pv+ (Paul Vader)
and given that there's no rapture in The Stand,
it's hardly literal anyway. The 'left behind' books make no secret of what
they are. *

Just because the book doesn't present the fundamentalist view of
the apocalypse doesn't mean it's not about a Christian apocalypse.

[lal_truckee]

Neither "suppress" nor "ban" was mentioned - an 18 and over stack was
mentioned, carefully without identifying 18 "what." Every r.a.sf.w
poster worth his salt knows librarians often interpret it as 18 months
old, for precocious kids, having universally been such ourselves.

I didn't know that.

Why, you, you, you must be a ... Mundane.

[Mike Schilling]

Post by lal_truckee

Neither "suppress" nor "ban" was mentioned - an 18 and over stack was
mentioned, carefully without identifying 18 "what." Every r.a.sf.w
poster worth his salt knows librarians often interpret it as 18 months
old, for precocious kids, having universally been such ourselves.

I didn't know that.

Why, you, you, you must be a ... Mundane.

Or a Muggle. Definitely not a Bright or a Slan.

[Andrew Plotkin]

Post by lal_truckee

Neither "suppress" nor "ban" was mentioned - an 18 and over stack was
mentioned, carefully without identifying 18 "what." Every r.a.sf.w
poster worth his salt knows librarians often interpret it as 18 months
old, for precocious kids, having universally been such ourselves.

I didn't know that.

Why, you, you, you must be a ... Mundane.

But I *am*. I've never been to an event -- not even Pennsic, though I
live in Pittsburgh. I don't own a scrap of period clothing.

For my next trick, I will demonstrate that I am a Gentile, despite the
bar mitzvah. :)

In fact, there was no section in my hometown library labelled "18 and
over". The sections were marked "Children", "Young Adult", and... the
adult books had no specific label, I guess.

And the librarian said "You might find this interesting," and handed
me _The Wasp Factory_. Yow.

--Z

"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."
*
* Make your vote count. Get your vote counted.

[lal_truckee]

Post by Andrew Plotkin

Post by lal_truckee

Neither "suppress" nor "ban" was mentioned - an 18 and over stack was
mentioned, carefully without identifying 18 "what." Every r.a.sf.w
poster worth his salt knows librarians often interpret it as 18 months
old, for precocious kids, having universally been such ourselves.

I didn't know that.

Why, you, you, you must be a ... Mundane.

But I *am*. I've never been to an event -- not even Pennsic, though I
live in Pittsburgh. I don't own a scrap of period clothing.
For my next trick, I will demonstrate that I am a Gentile, despite the
bar mitzvah. :)
In fact, there was no section in my hometown library labelled "18 and
over". The sections were marked "Children", "Young Adult", and... the
adult books had no specific label, I guess.
And the librarian said "You might find this interesting," and handed
me _The Wasp Factory_. Yow.

Pub 1984. Why, why, why you must be younger than my ... car.
But officially recognized by the Holy Librarian as - a precocious kid!

[Ross TenEyck]

Waitaminnit, how many people are taken up in the rapture? (And is
there any evidence that the Rapture hasn't already occurred, with all
12 people in a state of grace being taken up?)

If it were going to happen, it should've happened within a human lifetime
(less) of Christ's death and resurrection. That's what He said was gonna
happen. I lean towards your theory - it already happened, and all six people
found worthy just up 'n disappeared one day in about 50CE. As for the
Revelator, well, we all know what it's like to go on a bit of a bender.

As an aside, the notes in my bible suggest the following explanation
for that. Jesus was actually prophecying two different events: the
destruction of the second Temple, and the Second Coming. The destruction
of the Temple did indeed happen within a human lifetime of his teachings;
but to the Apostles -- before either event -- they both sounded sufficiently
end-of-the-world-ish that they mistakenly conflated the two prophecies.

The Gospels as we know them weren't written down until after the Temple
had been destroyed, but by that time the key mistake had become part of
the record, and it was impossible to disentangle it from the other material.

I offer this on the grounds that it suggests some SF-ish notions about
how one goes about preserving and interpreting a true prophecy, should
such a thing exist.

--
================== http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~teneyck ==================
Ross TenEyck Seattle, WA \ Light, kindled in the furnace of hydrogen;
***@alumni.caltech.edu \ like smoke, sunlight carries the hot-metal
Are wa yume? Soretomo maboroshi? \ tang of Creation's forge.

[The Cardassian Scot]

Post by Ross TenEyck

Waitaminnit, how many people are taken up in the rapture? (And is
there any evidence that the Rapture hasn't already occurred, with all
12 people in a state of grace being taken up?)

If it were going to happen, it should've happened within a human lifetime
(less) of Christ's death and resurrection. That's what He said was gonna
happen. I lean towards your theory - it already happened, and all six people
found worthy just up 'n disappeared one day in about 50CE. As for the
Revelator, well, we all know what it's like to go on a bit of a bender.

As an aside, the notes in my bible suggest the following explanation
for that. Jesus was actually prophecying two different events: the
destruction of the second Temple, and the Second Coming. The destruction
of the Temple did indeed happen within a human lifetime of his teachings;
but to the Apostles -- before either event -- they both sounded sufficiently
end-of-the-world-ish that they mistakenly conflated the two prophecies.
The Gospels as we know them weren't written down until after the Temple
had been destroyed, but by that time the key mistake had become part of
the record, and it was impossible to disentangle it from the other material.

This isn't quite accurate. You can acutally read these passages in the
Gospels as referring only to the destruction of the temple and not
referring to Jesus second coming at all. If anyone's intrested in the
details I can post them, but I'm guess most people won't be.

As for the gospel's being written after the Temple was destroyed, that's
true for the most part, but Mark was probably written just before the
Temple was destroyed, somewhere in the 60's AD.

Post by Ross TenEyck
I offer this on the grounds that it suggests some SF-ish notions about
how one goes about preserving and interpreting a true prophecy, should
such a thing exist.

This view mis-interprets true prophecy in roughly the same way the
author's of the LB series mis-interpret true prophecy. Firstly, the
primary focus of Biblical prophecy is not to predict the future but to
tell human's what God wants. Sometimes this is a warning about God's
judgement in the future if their is no repentance. Sometimes it is an
encouragement that those who are suffering now should hold on and not
give up the faith because vindication is coming in the future. For the
most part where this refers to the future this is vauge, in the sense
that it is an annoucement of God's intentions and not a blow by blow
account of what will happen. In general the Bible is not about giving
highly detailed accounts of minuit details of the future, although there
are exceptions. Even in the case of these more detailed bits the
emphasis is on the message this prophecy contains, judgement, warning,
encourgament, ..., not on predicting the future for the sake of it.

Anyway, I think there's a point in the above ramble. Ah, yes, there is
genuine prophecy, but's it's not what is often thought of as prophecy.

[Timothy McDaniel]

Uncle Hugo's sf bookstore (Minneapolis) shelves the paperback editions with
their other books.

I heard once that the MIT SF club library once had a debate about
where to shelve a Bible. Final answer: anthologies, under God, ed.

[Sean O'Hara]

In the Year of the Goat, the Great and Powerful Timothy McDaniel
declared...

Post by Timothy McDaniel

Uncle Hugo's sf bookstore (Minneapolis) shelves the paperback editions with
their other books.

I heard once that the MIT SF club library once had a debate about
where to shelve a Bible. Final answer: anthologies, under God, ed.

Surely that should be "Nicaea, Council of" for Catholic Bibles
and "Trent, Council of" for Protestant ones.

[Matt Austern]

Post by Sean O'Hara
In the Year of the Goat, the Great and Powerful Timothy McDaniel
declared...

Post by Timothy McDaniel

Uncle Hugo's sf bookstore (Minneapolis) shelves the paperback editions with
their other books.

I heard once that the MIT SF club library once had a debate about
where to shelve a Bible. Final answer: anthologies, under God, ed.

Surely that should be "Nicaea, Council of" for Catholic Bibles
and "Trent, Council of" for Protestant ones.

That might have been valid, but that's not in fact where MITSFS
shelved its copy of the Christian Bible. (Not when I was there,
anyway.) It was shelved in the regular stacks, indeed on the "G"
shelf.

[William December Starr]

Post by Matt Austern

Post by Sean O'Hara

Post by Timothy McDaniel
I heard once that the MIT SF club library once had a debate about
where to shelve a Bible. Final answer: anthologies, under God, ed.

Surely that should be "Nicaea, Council of" for Catholic Bibles
and "Trent, Council of" for Protestant ones.

That might have been valid, but that's not in fact where MITSFS
shelved its copy of the Christian Bible. (Not when I was there,
anyway.) It was shelved in the regular stacks, indeed on the "G"
shelf.

Currently we have the following books listed as anthologies with
"God" as the editor:

BHAGAVAD-GITA
GREAT NEWS: THE NEW TESTAMENT, THE (NEW INTERNATIONAL)
HOLY BIBLE, THE (GIDEON)
NEW TESTAMENT, THE (KING JAMES)
NEW TESTAMENT, THE (REVISED STANDARD)

Our copy of _The Book of Mormon_, incidentally, is filed under
"Mormon." I'm not sure how that decision was arrived at.

-- William December Starr <***@panix.com>

[Robert Sneddon]

Post by William December Starr
Currently we have the following books listed as anthologies with
BHAGAVAD-GITA
GREAT NEWS: THE NEW TESTAMENT, THE (NEW INTERNATIONAL)
HOLY BIBLE, THE (GIDEON)
NEW TESTAMENT, THE (KING JAMES)
NEW TESTAMENT, THE (REVISED STANDARD)
Our copy of _The Book of Mormon_, incidentally, is filed under
"Mormon." I'm not sure how that decision was arrived at.

Perhaps it should be classed as "fanfiction"?

[Richard R. Hershberger]

Post by Sean O'Hara
In the Year of the Goat, the Great and Powerful Timothy McDaniel
declared...

Post by Timothy McDaniel
I heard once that the MIT SF club library once had a debate about
where to shelve a Bible. Final answer: anthologies, under God, ed.

Surely that should be "Nicaea, Council of" for Catholic Bibles
and "Trent, Council of" for Protestant ones.

I know it's not great form to jump in nearly a week later, but... You
might want to go back and review the Council of Trent: who held it
and why.

[John S. Novak, III]

By "preachy" I mean the action stopping so the Good characters can give
sermons.

OK, that's never good. However, preachy can also be used to mean that
the point is made very obviously even when it is not done by stopping
the action, at least I think it can. However, I could be wrong, it has
been known to happen before.

I usually take "reachy" to mean that the point is made very
heavy-handedly, and in a fashion where if you don't agree with the
final point, the author will basically call you an idiot and insult
you, in media.

[Bryan Derksen]

On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 06:49:55 GMT, Matt Ruff

Which does raise the question, are there any novels dealing with the
Rapture that might be interesting to someone else?

Not a novel, but I did rather enjoy this short story:

http://home.pacifier.com/~ascott/fictions/megiddo.htm

[Dan Goodman]

Post by Bryan Derksen
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 06:49:55 GMT, Matt Ruff

Which does raise the question, are there any novels dealing with the
Rapture that might be interesting to someone else?

http://home.pacifier.com/~ascott/fictions/megiddo.htm

Thanks for that one!!

[Robert Carnegie]

I'm not sure how hateful it is, but there is some scary stuff in
there. Stuff that makes you go WTF?!? For instance, around the 3rd
or 4th book (don't recall, they all blend together), two of the main
characters who are newlyweds decide they want to have a baby. Hello!
you're in the middle of 7 years of hell on earth, evil guys chasing
you, you're in hiding (half-assed, but hiding nonetheless), and
there's a good shot you're going to end up dead, and you want to have
a baby? How dumb is that?

In the survivalist-oriented book "Patriots: Surviving the Coming Collapse"
two of the main characters - who are fundamentalist Christians - decide
to
have a baby in the midst of not the End of the World, but the End of the
World As We Know It. It's treated as a swell idea and it all works out - it
even gives the little tyke a chance to have a cute widdle voice-over where
he prays for everybody.
I agree that it's dumb. However, in the mindset of somebody who
believes in
Rapture-istic Christianity, the refrain of "Let go and let God," especially
when it comes to being fruitful and multiplying, is more than just a T-shirt
slogan. If God wants them to have a baby, they will, and it'll work out
swell. Of course, this never seems to apply in the converse - if God
*doesn't* want them to have a baby, by making it clear they're going to
have to spend several tens of thousands of my insurance
premium dollars to have a shot at all, somehow they never take
that as friendly advice, let alone an edict.

Ah, let me point out your fallacy. If something looks difficult, that
doesn't mean that God doesn't want it to happen. It can mean that
God wants people to be impressed when he makes it happen.
E.g., Abraham and Sarah having kids when they're like eighty or
something screwy like that. Close to the situation you describe.

Now you do have to have faith that the Lord will provide. In your
scenario, the Lord is providing to them through your insurance
premiums. Does this suck? Maybe. Could you have chosen
another insurer?

Robert Carnegie at home, ***@excite.com at large

[Dreamer]

Post by Robert Carnegie
Ah, let me point out your fallacy. If something looks difficult, that
doesn't mean that God doesn't want it to happen. It can mean that
God wants people to be impressed when he makes it happen.
E.g., Abraham and Sarah having kids when they're like eighty or
something screwy like that. Close to the situation you describe.

Oh, I'm quite aware that the comparison is not strictly accurate and I admit
that your statement is correct. I just find it Amusing, is all. It's a
subset of the larger "Everything good that happens is evidence of God's
love, and everything bad that happens is the work of Satan, evil people, or
an accident" mindset so prevalent in many primitive Christians. God says in
His autobiography that He is the source of all things, evil and good alike.
He never seems to get the blame for the bad stuff, though.

D

[Dreamer]

Post by Dreamer
Oh, I'm quite aware that the comparison is not strictly accurate and I admit
that your statement is correct. I just find it Amusing, is all. It's a
subset of the larger "Everything good that happens is evidence of God's
love, and everything bad that happens is the work of Satan, evil people, or
an accident" mindset so prevalent in many primitive Christians. God says in
His autobiography that He is the source of all things, evil and good alike.
He never seems to get the blame for the bad stuff, though.

I think it was Jeff Stilson who remarked on football players
who thank God for their victories that he'd like to hear one
say "Yeah, we were in the game -- until *Jesus* made me fumble."

Closest I've ever heard was somebody asking Jeff Gordon (NASCAR race driver,
well-known Born-Again Christian) something like this at a press conference,
after he narrowly won a race (he almost ran out of gas.)

(heavily paraphrased)

Q: "How does the Lord Jesus Christ help to give you the victory in a race?"

A: (considers) "Well, He gives us team spirit, helps us work together
well... but He sure as heck didn't give us any extra gas."

D

[Mike Schilling]

Post by Dreamer

I think it was Jeff Stilson who remarked on football players
who thank God for their victories that he'd like to hear one
say "Yeah, we were in the game -- until *Jesus* made me fumble."

Closest I've ever heard was somebody asking Jeff Gordon (NASCAR race driver,
well-known Born-Again Christian) something like this at a press conference,
after he narrowly won a race (he almost ran out of gas.)
(heavily paraphrased)
Q: "How does the Lord Jesus Christ help to give you the victory in a race?"
A: (considers) "Well, He gives us team spirit, helps us work together
well... but He sure as heck didn't give us any extra gas."
D

That is an awfully good answer. Even better if it continued

Q. "Doesn't Christ give <the 2nd-place finisher> thse things as well?

A. Sure he does. But my car's faster.

[Walter Bushell]

Post by Dreamer
Oh, I'm quite aware that the comparison is not strictly accurate and I admit
that your statement is correct. I just find it Amusing, is all. It's a
subset of the larger "Everything good that happens is evidence of God's
love, and everything bad that happens is the work of Satan, evil people, or
an accident" mindset so prevalent in many primitive Christians. God says in
His autobiography that He is the source of all things, evil and good alike.
He never seems to get the blame for the bad stuff, though.

I think it was Jeff Stilson who remarked on football players
who thank God for their victories that he'd like to hear one
say "Yeah, we were in the game -- until *Jesus* made me fumble."

"I'll never trust that f|_|cking Jesus again."

[Bill Woods]

Post by Dreamer
Oh, I'm quite aware that the comparison is not strictly accurate and I admit
that your statement is correct. I just find it Amusing, is all. It's a
subset of the larger "Everything good that happens is evidence of God's
love, and everything bad that happens is the work of Satan, evil people, or
an accident" mindset so prevalent in many primitive Christians. God says in
His autobiography that He is the source of all things, evil and good alike.
He never seems to get the blame for the bad stuff, though.

I think it was Jeff Stilson who remarked on football players
who thank God for their victories that he'd like to hear one
say "Yeah, we were in the game -- until *Jesus* made me fumble."

ObSF: "Angels in the Outfield" After the California Angels benefit
from divine intervention all summer, the kid is surprised to see one
of the angels (Christopher Lloyd?) sitting beside him in the stands.
When asked why he isn't doing his job the angel says approximately,
"Hey, this is the playoffs! They're on their own now."

In his memoirs, Daniel V. Gallery wrote that during World War II
he wanted to have a prayer service before his ship went into battle,
but on the other hand asking for help just as they went into a fight
seemed a bit like cheating. He scheduled regular services, so that
whenever they did get into a fight it would be not very long after.

--
Bill Woods

Unitarianism: the belief in, at most, one God.

[Bryan Derksen]

On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 06:49:55 GMT, Matt Ruff

Which does raise the question, are there any novels dealing with the
Rapture that might be interesting to someone else?

I haven't actually read them, but do the Doom novelizations count? Or
do they diverge too much from the biblical source material? :)

[Mark Atwood]

Which does raise the question, are there any novels dealing with the
Rapture that might be interesting to someone else? I mentioned the
Michael Tolkin film in another thread, but can't think of any books
that qualify, although King's _The Stand_ comes close with its
religious apocalypse.

There is always RAH's _Job_, of course.

[Matt Ruff]

Post by Mark Atwood

Which does raise the question, are there any novels dealing with the
Rapture that might be interesting to someone else? I mentioned the
Michael Tolkin film in another thread, but can't think of any books
that qualify, although King's _The Stand_ comes close with its
religious apocalypse.

There is always RAH's _Job_, of course.

_Job_ is about the Rapture?

-- M. Ruff

[Doom & Gloom Dave]

On Wed, 09 Jul 2003 21:08:55 -0300, Danny Sichel

_Walden Two_ is nonfiction, yes?

Ack. I was thinking of the *original* _On Walden Pond_.

It's just _Walden_.

I was thinking it was a moving starring Thoreau, Hepburn and two
Fondas.

[Danny Sichel]

_Walden Two_ is nonfiction, yes?

Ack. I was thinking of the *original* _On Walden Pond_.

It's just _Walden_.

I was thinking it was a moving starring Thoreau, Hepburn and two Fondas.

That was _On *Golden* Pond_, I think.

[Michael Stemper]

No, because only those in a "state of Grace" are seized up in the Rapture.
At one point, IIRC, a minister says that he wasn't seized up because he had
the occasional impure thought about a woman other than his wife. That won't
send him to Hell, but it did mean he wasn't pure enough to get a Get Out of
Armageddon Free card - he has to work for it.

Waitaminnit, how many people are taken up in the rapture?

I believe that the canonical answer is "144,000 -- 12,000 from each
of the Twelve Tribes of Israel."

(And is
there any evidence that the Rapture hasn't already occurred, with all
12 people in a state of grace being taken up?)

Well, I'd think that some of the 144,000 would have been driving or
something, where their sudden disappearance would have made at least
"The News of the Wierd".

[Timothy McDaniel]

Post by Michael Stemper
I believe that the canonical answer is "144,000 -- 12,000 from each
of the Twelve Tribes of Israel."

For further information on the Revelation of S. John, you might go to
<http://www.e-sheep.com/apocamon/>, which has Flash animations of the
Apocalypse starring Pokemon characters. Between my first hit today
and my reload, it went unavailable, but it came back quickly.

[Walter Bushell]

Post by Michael Stemper

No, because only those in a "state of Grace" are seized up in the Rapture.
At one point, IIRC, a minister says that he wasn't seized up because he had
the occasional impure thought about a woman other than his wife. That won't
send him to Hell, but it did mean he wasn't pure enough to get a Get Out of
Armageddon Free card - he has to work for it.

Waitaminnit, how many people are taken up in the rapture?

I believe that the canonical answer is "144,000 -- 12,000 from each
of the Twelve Tribes of Israel."

(And is
there any evidence that the Rapture hasn't already occurred, with all
12 people in a state of grace being taken up?)

Well, I'd think that some of the 144,000 would have been driving or
something, where their sudden disappearance would have made at least
"The News of the Wierd".

They were mostly in Africa and not noticed.

[Matt Austern]

But I'll venture to add that there's a widespread feeling, in the
SF-reading community, that "Left Behind" is written by and for people
who want to feel self-righteous about their religious beliefs -- and
is not interesting to anyone else.

Which does raise the question, are there any novels dealing with the
Rapture that might be interesting to someone else? I mentioned the
Michael Tolkin film in another thread, but can't think of any books
that qualify, although King's _The Stand_ comes close with its
religious apocalypse.

Do you want the novels to be about the Rapture specifically, or are
you looking for novels about the Christian apocalypse in general?

If the latter is OK with you, then there are lots of choices.

[Brandon Ray]

Post by Matt Austern
Do you want the novels to be about the Rapture specifically, or are
you looking for novels about the Christian apocalypse in general?
If the latter is OK with you, then there are lots of choices.

I'd be interested in either.

[WareWolf]

Stephen King's "The Stand" is about an apocalypse, complete with
God coming down to squash the Devil at the end, but it's not
preachy.

You obviously read a different edition than I did.

Dusty


--


This week's column: Sodomy, The Supremes, and the Two Amigos
http://dusty.booksnbytes.com/columns/2003/2003_0706.html

[Chuck Bridgeland]

On the advice of several friends, my fiance and I started on the _Left
Behind_ series. I'm in the middle of Book 1, _Left Behind_, and my
fiance is almost through book 3, _Nicolae_. I'm thinking it's a
decent enough book, but I'm finding it a bit... preachy.
Let me explain: I don't mind books that use heavy religious themes or
tones per se. (I really liked _The Chronicles of Narnia_, for
example.) But to me, _Left Behind_ is almost like reading a
schoolbook with snatches of a good story, instead of being a good
story with a strong religious theme. If I want to learn about the
space program, I'm not going to read _Star Wars_; or if I want to
learn about sword fighting, I'm not going to watch _Highlander_, even
though I enjoy both. By the same token, if I want to learn about this
particular aspect of Christian dogma (yes, I know that many strains of
Christianity don't hold the rapture as doctorine, but I'm
generalizing),
Anyways, my fiance claims that the preachiness level increases with
each book. Does this jibe with your opinions on the series? Does it
decrease (or at least, level off) somewhere down the line? And if it
doesn't, is the story worth the annoyance?
Just wondering. Any feedback would be appreciated.

I'm one of those evangelical Christians that some find so scary. I've got no
desire to read the Left Behind books. I have better things to do with my
time.

I did watch the video. Laughed in inappropriate places (like when the guy's
car blew up -- talk about multiple cliches!).

[Matt Ruff]

Post by Chuck Bridgeland
I'm one of those evangelical Christians that some find so scary. I've got no
desire to read the Left Behind books. I have better things to do with my
time.
I did watch the video. Laughed in inappropriate places (like when the guy's
car blew up -- talk about multiple cliches!).

The preview trailers for other films in the same genre were also pretty
funny. "Apocalypse III: Tribulation" starring Gary Busey, Margot Kidder,
and Howie Mandel looked especially promising...

-- M. Ruff

[Joseph Michael Bay]

Post by Matt Ruff
The preview trailers for other films in the same genre were also pretty
funny. "Apocalypse III: Tribulation" starring Gary Busey, Margot Kidder,
and Howie Mandel looked especially promising...

Howie Mandel, as in "Bobby's World"? <boggle>. One to watch for.

Nick Mancuso, also. Busey plays a guy who has a traumatic
head injury in a vehicle crash and then gets religion. Bit
of a stretch for him?

[Walter Bushell]

Yes. You still get to go to Heaven as long as you've accepted Christ
as your Saviour when you die. I personally would be *more* motivated
to do so after the Tribulations started, because there would at long
last be some proof that the God-botherers know what they're talking
about. I still wouldn't do it, but I would at least start to

consider

it a rational act.

"So I won't be submerged in boiling mag-ma and poked with
pitchforks, but I *will* have to listen to *those* guys singing
all day, every day, without relief? Um ... let me think about it."

"Welcome to Heaven. Here's your harp and tuner."
"Welcome to Hell. Here's your harp."

"...accordion", surely.

No.
The joke is: In Heaven, you get a harp and tuner. In Hell, you only get
the harp.

Yes, good one. But I thought accordions were funnier. Perhaps continuous
accordion music, occasionally interrupted by electric bass solos.

Drum solo's.

[Karl M Syring]

Post by Walter Bushell

The joke is: In Heaven, you get a harp and tuner. In Hell, you only get
the harp.

Yes, good one. But I thought accordions were funnier. Perhaps continuous
accordion music, occasionally interrupted by electric bass solos.

Drum solo's.

Hmm, certains forms of techno-pop have been use for torture
in Iraq. Guess that would work nicely. For me, the
worst form of torture would to be forced to watch certain
soap operas on TV.

Karl M. Syring

[David Eppstein]

Post by Walter Bushell
Drum solo's.

ObSF Brust's _Phoenix_.

There must be other sfw in which solo drummers play some part (if only
to impart a pseudo-native-american ambiance) but I'm having a hard time
thinking of it.

[Konrad Gaertner]

Post by David Eppstein

Post by Walter Bushell
Drum solo's.

ObSF Brust's _Phoenix_.
There must be other sfw in which solo drummers play some part (if only
to impart a pseudo-native-american ambiance) but I'm having a hard time
thinking of it.

Better yet, his short story "Drift".


--KG

[William December Starr]

Post by David Eppstein

Post by Walter Bushell
Drum solo's.

ObSF Brust's _Phoenix_.
There must be other sfw in which solo drummers play some part (if
only to impart a pseudo-native-american ambiance) but I'm having a
hard time thinking of it.

Random drummed, as a hobby, in the Amber books. Does that count?

-- William December Starr <***@panix.com>

[Danny Sichel]

Post by William December Starr

Post by David Eppstein

Post by Walter Bushell
Drum solo's.

ObSF Brust's _Phoenix_.
There must be other sfw in which solo drummers play some part (if
only to impart a pseudo-native-american ambiance) but I'm having a
hard time thinking of it.

Random drummed, as a hobby, in the Amber books. Does that count?

Well, if we delete the w, there's always the Drummer, from Warren
Ellis's _Planetary_...

("Don't lie to me, Drums. You were making that TV pick up alien porn
channels again, weren't you.")

Oh, and for some reason, part of my brain wants to classify Bugs Potter
as borderline SF.

[Robert Carnegie]

Post by David Eppstein

Post by Walter Bushell
Drum solo's.

ObSF Brust's _Phoenix_.
There must be other sfw in which solo drummers play some part (if only
to impart a pseudo-native-american ambiance) but I'm having a hard time
thinking of it.

From a blurb that I quoted quite recently:

"Amber - a future or a parallel world? Prince Corwen,
philosopher, womanizer, possessed drummer, is determined to
find out."

Welll, not exactly. And I'm not sure that our drummer in _Sign of
the Unicorn_ by Roger Zelazny is a solo drummer in a sense that
you have in mind; mostly, I think, he jams. OTOH, eventually we
see his drum kit set up in Amber Palace itself.

Robert Carnegie at home, ***@excite.com at large

[R. P. Johnson]

Post by Robert Carnegie
"Amber - a future or a parallel world? Prince Corwen,
philosopher, womanizer, possessed drummer, is determined to
find out."

Did they mispell his name too?
--
R. P. Johnson ***@mindspring.com

[Robert Carnegie]

Post by R. P. Johnson

Post by Robert Carnegie
"Amber - a future or a parallel world? Prince Corwen,
philosopher, womanizer, possessed drummer, is determined to
find out."

Did they mispell his name too?

Yes, it's "(sic)", except that the blurb is longer, and wronger. Look
up "Prince Corwen" via http://groups.google.com/ for the rest - if
Google doesn't drop it for being substantially similar to this
thread, of course.

Robert Carnegie at home, ***@excite.com at large

[Robert Carnegie]

Post by Robert Carnegie

Post by David Eppstein

Post by Walter Bushell
Drum solo's.

ObSF Brust's _Phoenix_.
There must be other sfw in which solo drummers play some part (if only
to impart a pseudo-native-american ambiance) but I'm having a hard

time

Post by David Eppstein
thinking of it.

"Amber - a future or a parallel world? Prince Corwen,
philosopher, womanizer, possessed drummer, is determined to
find out."
Welll, not exactly. And I'm not sure that our drummer in _Sign of
the Unicorn_ by Roger Zelazny is a solo drummer in a sense that
you have in mind; mostly, I think, he jams. OTOH, eventually we
see his drum kit set up in Amber Palace itself.

...who was moved, eventually, to check on detail, and to find the
alleged philosopher and womanizer playing in the palace for the
benefit of one of the next generation (actually, two of the next
generation, since young Merlin's eavesdropping) in chapter nine
of _Knight of Shadows_. Then the other kid comes in on alto sax.

[Mark 'Kamikaze' Hughes]

Post by Walter Bushell
Drum solo's.

<http://www.angryflower.com/aposter.html>

[Walter Bushell]

On Wed, 09 Jul 2003 05:22:03 GMT, "Mike Schilling"

My Hell would have all my favorite folk music -- "improved" by classical
musicians.

Like Bartok, or Vaughn Williams? Not hellish to me (see de gustibus,
above.)

Actually, the Beethoven arrangements of Scottish folk-songs are quite
nice, too.

I think he means more like Odetta sings the Blues. >;)(

[Eric D. Berge]

Post by Walter Bushell

On Wed, 09 Jul 2003 05:22:03 GMT, "Mike Schilling"

My Hell would have all my favorite folk music -- "improved" by classical
musicians.

Like Bartok, or Vaughn Williams? Not hellish to me (see de gustibus,
above.)

Actually, the Beethoven arrangements of Scottish folk-songs are quite
nice, too.

I think he means more like Odetta sings the Blues. >;)(

???

I have heard her do so in concert, and she's great.

[Walter Bushell]

Post by Eric D. Berge

Post by Walter Bushell

On Wed, 09 Jul 2003 05:22:03 GMT, "Mike Schilling"

My Hell would have all my favorite folk music -- "improved" by classical
musicians.

Like Bartok, or Vaughn Williams? Not hellish to me (see de gustibus,
above.)

Actually, the Beethoven arrangements of Scottish folk-songs are quite
nice, too.

I think he means more like Odetta sings the Blues. >;)(

???
I have heard her do so in concert, and she's great.

Real folk fans think she is overly refined.

[Eric D. Berge]

Post by Walter Bushell

Post by Walter Bushell

On Wed, 09 Jul 2003 05:22:03 GMT, "Mike Schilling"

My Hell would have all my favorite folk music -- "improved" by classical
musicians.

Like Bartok, or Vaughn Williams? Not hellish to me (see de gustibus,
above.)

Actually, the Beethoven arrangements of Scottish folk-songs are quite
nice, too.

I think he means more like Odetta sings the Blues. >;)(

??? I have heard her do so in concert, and she's great.

Real folk fans think she is overly refined.

Uh-huh.

What's a real folk fan?

[Walter Bushell]

However, I'm listening to harp music right now. And the "those guys"
in classical Christian heaven would be singing a large portion of
the best music in the history of Western civilization.

"Bach gave us God's Word.
Mozart gave us God's laughter.
Beethoven gave us God's fire.
God gave us Music that we might pray without words."
The theology is questionable, but the result is incomparable.

I believe it was Augustine who said that "those who sing, pray twice...".

You sure he didn't say pay twice?

[Jason Maxwell]

Post by Walter Bushell

However, I'm listening to harp music right now. And the "those guys"
in classical Christian heaven would be singing a large portion of
the best music in the history of Western civilization.

"Bach gave us God's Word.
Mozart gave us God's laughter.
Beethoven gave us God's fire.
God gave us Music that we might pray without words."
The theology is questionable, but the result is incomparable.

I believe it was Augustine who said that "those who sing, pray twice...".

You sure he didn't say pay twice?
--

No, that's the RIAA...

Jason

[Walter Bushell]

Well then, they're fucked, 'cause the Rapture happened in 1994.
Damn few people were in a state of grace at the time.

Doesn't that mean the End of the World happened in '01? Shit, nobody
ever tells me _anything_ around here . . .

You clearly were not paying attention to events in Florida at the end of
2000.

OBSF: Heinlein's _Stranger_ has a church anouncing the world has ended
and the current conditions are illusions without form or substance.

[Walter Bushell]

No, because only those in a "state of Grace" are seized up in the Rapture.
At one point, IIRC, a minister says that he wasn't seized up because he had
the occasional impure thought about a woman other than his wife. That won't
send him to Hell, but it did mean he wasn't pure enough to get a Get Out of
Armageddon Free card - he has to work for it.

Waitaminnit, how many people are taken up in the rapture? (And is
there any evidence that the Rapture hasn't already occurred, with all
12 people in a state of grace being taken up?)

If it were going to happen, it should've happened within a human lifetime
(less) of Christ's death and resurrection. That's what He said was gonna
happen. I lean towards your theory - it already happened, and all six people
found worthy just up 'n disappeared one day in about 50CE. As for the
Revelator, well, we all know what it's like to go on a bit of a bender.
D

Mouldy bread, the pre LSD equivalent of a bad acid trip.

[Walter Bushell]

_Walden Two_ is nonfiction, yes?

Ack. I was thinking of the *original* _On Walden Pond_. _Walden Two_, I
don't know about.

The orginal is considerably fictionalized. One year is condensed from
several. He talks about his vegitarian diet he grows himself. He was
taking a lot of meals in town, etc.