Sheep go to heaven; Goats go to hell, or Scott_plaid's very own atheism thread

The BBQ Pit
1

You know, I always wondered why people look for elaborate reasons why they are not religious, when they can just point to an outlook on life that produces the pope’s new book. Pope decides entire Enlightenment was a bad idea

Now, I have decide to put forth my ideas in the pit, since I am angry about religion, and not religious debates since must off my concepts have met with a bad reception there. It makes sense that it would, after all, most of the people in this forum do not depend upon the literal meaning of stories that I critique. Of course, that hasn’t stopped 2000+ plus years of people believing said stories. Also, it seems people are encouraged to contribute to a thread about why they don’t believe. I don’t believe that an atheist needs to start specific reasons, personally, though I could name a few, since:

I believe in the universe.

Deists believe in the universe and god.

I believe that have one extra thing that seems to lack explanation needs explaining. I can elaborate on that if people wish, though I bet I won’t get much response.

Now, anyone who would like to put down their thought, with the intent of me commenting will have to wait, since I will be logging off in a few minutes, till tomorrow.

Now that all the disclaimers are out of the way, I will put forth my anger.

I believe that christianity, the main religion around these parts promotes a “Sheep go to heaven, Goats go to hell” outlook on just about everything. I don’t believe this is good for mankind. Or womankind, for that matter. I might have other thought later, and if anyone comments, then I will try to respond, but given the level of arguments I started in the past on this very forum, I don’t blame anyone if they don’t open this thread to take a look.

2

Not to nitpick, but the Pope doesn’t say, in his book, that the enlightenment was a bad idea. What the Pope said was a bad idea was, 1. Unbridled capitalism that doesn’t take into account human needs, and 2. The idea that moral laws can be decided by consensus or majoirity rule.

3

God smote your link, Mr. plaid. Care to try again?

4

Dam, I hate it when she does that. Oh kay.
I’ll try again. A la’ Peanut Butter Sandwiches!

Pope decides entire Enlightenment was a bad idea

Oh, and SuperGrover brought me this:
Pope labels democracy ‘godless’

In case you are woundering about the muppet references, I watched the Muppet Movie last night.

Now I really will log off.

5

Scott_plaid, at the risk of causing offense, how old are you?

6

As both a Christian and a fine young Saanan doe, I take great umbrage at your suggestion that Christianity dictates I’m hell-bound–please, take your capricious jabs at my faith elsewhere. While some Christians may read the bible in a more literalist fashion and infer that my kind deserves to be cast into a lake of fire, there are other ways to read and interpret scripture, and I invite you to expand your knowledge of my faith: there’s more to Christianity then fundamentalist hellfire.

If this gets any replies, I predict at least one will accuse me of being a LIAR who should be banned. I apologize in advance. There, I said it, and it took a lot of class.

7

Why?

8

You know, in archaeological sites, scientists often find animal bones that they can’t identify. They’re either sheep or goats but no one knows which because the bone structure of both the animals are alike. Consequently, they’re called sheep-goats. Doesn’t really matter what they really were. They’re now sheep-goats. Because whether you’re a sheep or a goat, you look exactly the same dead.
I’m just sayin’ is all.

9

Er, I’m an atheist too but just because the pope might have said something detrimental towards Christianity doesn’t prove anything.

10

Scott, I have done my best to render your OP into some semblance of comprehensible English, although I have to confess that one or two passages eluded me. The quality of your arguments I will leave to greater minds than my own.

{translation mine}

"You know, I have always wondered why people look for elaborate reasons why they are not religious, when they can just point to an outlook on life which can produce the Pope’s new book. Pope decides entire Enlightenment was a bad idea

I have decided to put forth my ideas in the Pit, since I am angry about religion, and not in religious debates, since most of my concepts have met with a bad reception there. It makes sense that they would; after all, most of the people in this {that?} forum do not rely upon the literal meaning of the stories that I criticise.

Of course, that hasn’t stopped over 2000 years of people believing these said stories. It also seems that people are encouraged to contribute to a thread {threads?} about why they don’t believe, although I don’t personally believe that an atheist needs to state specific reasons. I could name a few, however, since:

I believe in the universe.

Deists believe in both the universe and god.

I believe that {I? we?} have one extra thing that seems to lack {an? any?} explanation {which?} needs explaining. I can elaborate on that if people wish, although I bet I won’t get much response.

Anyone who would like to put down their thoughts, intending to have me comment, will have to wait, since I will be logging off until tomorrow in a few minutes.

Now that all the disclaimers are out of the way, I will put forth my anger.

I believe that Christianity, the main religion around these parts {sic}, promotes a “Sheep go to heaven, Goats go to hell” outlook on almost everything, and I don’t believe that this is good for humanity.

I might have other thoughts later, and if anyone comments, then I will try to respond, but given the level of arguments {discussions? debates?} that I have started in the past in this forum, I don’t blame anyone if they don’t open this thread to take a look."

11

I’m less interested in how Anakin becomes Vader as to why he apparently becomes Frodo for the duration of this film.

12

Oh crap.

13

Don’t worry about it, Apos. Your first post makes more sense than the OP.

So, if Anakin becomes Frodo, who becomes Sam?

14

I’m back at the computer and have just been looking for where I heard that, people who are like unto goats go to Hell, while those who are unto sheep go to heaven. As any goatherd knows, goats are rebellious, whilse sheep just stand their and graze. Well I found it in none other then the newsgroup alt.fan.cecil-adams

Max posted the following, on a discussion, back in 1999

Roughly paraphrased: sheep go to heaven, goats go to hell.

(Jesus is speaking)

31 But when the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him,
then He will sit on His glorious throne
32 And all the nations will be gathered before Him: and He will separate them
from one another, as the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats;
33 and He will put the sheep on His right, and the goats on the left.
34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed of
My Father, inherit eh kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the
world.’”

skip down to verse 41

41 "Then he will also say to those on His left, ‘Depart from Me, accuresed
ones, into eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels;’
"

  • Max -
    ========================================
    Max said to them, “Come and have breakfast.”
    None of them ventured to question him, “Who are
    you?” knowing that it was Max. – Max 21:12

The part skipped says that those who do good works go to heaven, while those who simply proclaim “the lords name” The fact that a message to help people does matter, next to all the harm done by teaching such things. Even with a commandtment to do such good works, the anti-technological, antiquestioning mentality can be found in many other places.

15

What’s your problem exactly? If you don’t believe it anyway, why do you give a shit what it says?

16

I don’t think that question can be answered outside of a clinical setting.

17

The metaphor Apos unintentionally thrust into this thread actually may help to make sense of the issue at hand.

While Scott Plaid clearly has a concept in mind which he is not overly competent at conveying, I suspect it depends on the concept that “sheep” are people willing to be led pyschologically, not giving independent thought but following blindly, while “goats” are rebellious, roving, and curious. And that Ol’ Ebil Monolithic Christianity encourages being the blind-faith blandly-accepting sheep status, and condemns those who question or seek reasons and understanding.

The sense in which there is truth to that picture obscures the very real fact that there are serious things wrong with it.

First, he is founding it on (what I suspect is a misunderstanding of) one of the Pope’s recent writings. And while the Catholic Magisterium has an answer to every conceivable faith-and-morals question, it does not condemn the seeking of answers, or even independent thought that is willing to acknowledge the authority of the Magisterium. The “you gotta believe X and not ask questions, or you’re damned” viewpoint is a caricature of some evangelical Protestant groups and of the ruler-wielding nun schoolteachers, both taken as stereotypes rather than as actual real groups of persons. Many churches, including Catholicism, encourage questions to resolve doubts about their doctrine; many others, notably the Quakers, UCC, UUA, and Anglicans, are not doctrine-enamored but welcome and encourage independent thought and interpretive grasp of theological concepts.

Second, the sheep/goats metaphor is derived from Jesus’s parable of the last judgment, AKA of the sheep and goats, and it’s worth recognizing what’s going on in that parable. Jesus is inclined to use the “good shepherd” metaphor as standard for God or for Himself “wearing his God hat.” And, rather obviously, what a shepherd does, is herd sheep. Which means that he has to separate out any goats that decide to affiliate themselves with his flock of sheep. It’s important not to read into this the character of sheep vs. goat in terms of blind, bland followers vs. seekers after truth from the previous paragraph, because the criterion which is used to separate sheep from goats in this story is, quite simply, whether they did right by their fellow men. Overlaying the two concepts simply because each contrast sheep and goats is to do an injustice to the parable. And remember that all parables are stories told to make a single point; to condemn them because the analogy they construct doesn’t hold up when examined from an angle not intended in the course of the parable as story, is to do them injustice. It would be like condemning a poem that contrasts the oak and willow trees as metaphors for human staunchness and flexibility, for not dealing with eucalyptuses (eucalypti? the ones the dropbears live in, anyway).

Finally, the whole idea of stereotypes is running through this and tainting it to the point that it’s like wrestling Jello to respond to. I think Scott Plaid has a justifiable criticism of some attitudes by some loud Christian groups, and every right to hold to an atheist viewpoint if that is where his thinking, beliefs, and feelings take him. But I think that a combination of stereotyping and rather inchoate thought processes have led him to post a screed that does not conform to actual reality.

18

Why don’t you just say “I’m very angry about religion and when I say ‘religion’, I actually mean a rather small part of Christianity” - I reckon that would cover it.

19

What everone has said about a very small part of christian taking the lesson to heart is true.

However, it is in the bible, along with all the other parts that most families I know teach their children to emulate. Thus, the mentallity caused by the verse I have mentioned gets passed along.

20

Poly, I certainly agree that he has every right to hold whatever viewpoint he pleases. That said…

I think that what is off-putting, at least for me, is two-fold: (1) he comes across as though he is sharing epiphanic information, when in reality the ideas are as old as Aristarchus, and (2) his incessant ridicule is presented with language skills that are, frankly, Neanderthal. I mean, if I were going to burst into a community being all aggressive and ridiculing many of its members, I would at least try not to sound like an idiot.