Buddhism.........

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
"Christianity, if false, is of no importance, and if true, of infinite importance.
The only thing it cannot be is moderately important." -C. S. Lewis

Christianity, if false, is still immeasurably important! think of a world without the Passions of Bach, the Mozart and Haydn Masses, the Requiems of Brahms, Verdi, Fauré, Duruflé- these are all monumental spiritual offerings in the name of Christianity without which the world would be a poorer place. Who cares whether Christianoty is false if it has inspired these amazing musical works! The stunning cathedrals around the world, the artwork of the Renaissance!

Originally posted by Pianoman1
Christianity, if false, is still [b]immeasurably important! think of a world without the Passions of Bach, the Mozart and Haydn Masses, the Requiems of Brahms, Verdi, Fauré, Duruflé- these are all monumental spiritual offerings in the name of Christianity without which the world would be a poorer place. Who cares whether Christianoty is false if it ha ...[text shortened]... amazing musical works! The stunning cathedrals around the world, the artwork of the Renaissance![/b]

It's difficult to imagine how a genuine myth can be false, except to the literally minded.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
It's difficult to imagine how a genuine myth can be false, except to the literally minded.

"¿qué?"

What is a genuine myth?


In the case of Christianity...

Christianity claims (among other things) that:

There is some form of afterlife.

Some aspect of us can enter that afterlife.

What kind of afterlife we experience, or if we have one at all, is dictated by a
supreme being that created the universe and us in it.

That supreme being has sent various prophets and it's own son to give us
guidance on how to live and how to get a 'desirable' location in the afterlife.




If these are not actually true, if there is no supreme being, no afterlife, ect...

Then it is false.


How is this hard to imagine?

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
It's difficult to imagine how a genuine myth can be false, except to the literally minded.

I think you miss the whole point of my post. I was trying to underpin the immeasurable importance of Christianity as an inspiration to composers and artists.

Originally posted by Pianoman1
I think you miss the whole point of my post. I was trying to underpin the immeasurable importance of Christianity as an inspiration to composers and artists.

Oh, it's importance in that respect is self evident, I agree. Is there anything in my response that you respond to? Seeing as my response was addressed to you.

Originally posted by googlefudge
"¿qué?"

What is a genuine myth?


In the case of Christianity...

Christianity claims (among other things) that:

There is some form of afterlife.

Some aspect of us can enter that afterlife.

What kind of afterlife we experience, or if we have one at all, is dictated by a
supreme being that created the universe and us in it.

That supr ...[text shortened]... is no supreme being, no afterlife, ect...

Then it is false.


How is this hard to imagine?

Excellent questions.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Excellent questions.

I thought so...

Any chance of some excellent answers?

Originally posted by googlefudge
I thought so...

Any chance of some excellent answers?

For you? No. Find your own.

Originally posted by Pianoman1
I think you miss the whole point of my post. I was trying to underpin the immeasurable importance of Christianity as an inspiration to composers and artists.

Actually I would argue that it's been of measurable importance.

However it's undeniable that religion has influenced artists.

However it's also constrained them.

Yes people have produced great works of art (of all kinds) inspired
by and celebrating religion...
But that's often because they had little or no choice, that's who
was footing the bill.

For large periods of time we have almost nothing but religiously inspire art,
at the expense of everything else.

And it's only as religions grip on society has lessened that art has blossomed
into other areas of interest.

If we had never had Christianity we would still have had great art.

Just different great art.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
For you? No. Find your own.

Well I was questioning what you were talking about, so finding my own
answers pretty much consists of asking you what the hell you were talking
about.

So that's what I did.

Do you have a problem with me understanding what you were talking about?

Originally posted by googlefudge
Well I was questioning what you were talking about, so finding my own
answers pretty much consists of asking you what the hell you were talking
about.

So that's what I did.

Do you have a problem with me understanding what you were talking about?

Fair enough. I'm just not particularly interested in talking to you. Please excuse me.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Fair enough. I'm just not particularly interested in talking to you. Please excuse me.

Well that's nice and insulting.

Particularly as you could probably have answered my question in fewer words.

Oh well. I'll make a note to ignore you in future.

Sorry to have troubled you.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Well that's nice and insulting.

Particularly as you could probably have answered my question in fewer words.

Oh well. I'll make a note to ignore you in future.

Sorry to have troubled you.

It's for the best.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
It's for the best.

If I might be so bold, if you want to hold private discussions with people who
are already experts in the subject you wish to discuss... do it on a forum
dedicated to the topic, or in private.

If you do it on a public forum, it is reasonably assumed that others are free
and welcome to join in, as long as they follow the relevant rules of the forum
in question.

That way you get to hold your conversation in peace and quiet, and nobody else
gets insulted when you cut the out.


I would suggest that it's actually rather rude to intentionally hold a conversation
using highly technical (or specialist or non-standard) terms in a public space when
you have no intention of answering anyone's questions about what those terms mean.

I understand and sympathise that it's much easier to discuss complex issues with
the language specifically developed for that topic. However it's unfair to hold a
conversation in public that uses such specialist terms and not be prepared to explain them.


Of course if you are just making an exception for me then that's also rude and insulting but
just to me personally. However I am not sure what I might have done to deserve that from you.


Your tone is leading me to think the latter... But I'm leading with benefit of the doubt.

Originally posted by googlefudge
If I might be so bold, if you want to hold private discussions with people who
are already experts in the subject you wish to discuss... do it on a forum
dedicated to the topic, or in private.

If you do it on a public forum, it is reasonably assumed that others are free
and welcome to join in, as long as they follow the relevant rules of the for ...[text shortened]... .


Your tone is leading me to think the latter... But I'm leading with benefit of the doubt.

Please Hammer, don't hurt 'em.