Should it worry me that people on the Internet know me better than people in my everyday life do?
(Also, I accidentally bought the wrong kind of cookies. I like them, but not as much as the kind I wanted to get. Is it worth going out in 39 degrees F weather and take a 30 minute trip [one-way] to a store that closes in a little less than an hour in order to buy my preferred cookies, or should I just be grateful I like the cookies I bought?)
Why, Canada? WHY MUST YOU BE SO COLD??? I, er, I mean, uh… oh look, time to go wrestle a polar bear. Because as a Canadian I am of course impervious to all cold down to -63c. Or something. Yeah, that. *shifty eyes*
@Kernanator: While I cannot claim to know what kind of person you are IRL, I am reasonably familar with your Kernanator persona in regards to commenting style, which why I could predict to some extent your likely respones to certain comments.
it’s 39 degrees F up/down/left/right/circle/square/triangle/up/up/down/circle there? Seriously? Time to break out the shorts. not the short shorts yet, but…..
Well, it’s warm out, there. But a 30 minute drive when you already have cookies is just plain dumb, even in the best weather. Unless you’re buying it from somebody attractive, who you might have a shot with.
My dad used to fall asleep in church all the time and give himself whiplash, so his friend suggested that he sit in the back pew where he could rest his head against the wall. Unfortunately he still jerked his head back as he was falling asleep, and hit his head on the wall so hard it disturbed the whole service.
She seems to have a better grasp than Billie.
And she’s asking questions to help her understand the parts she doesn’t get! She’s ignorant, but she knows she is and ignorance you know about is fixable.
So she doesn’t know, but she knows that she doesn’t know, and you know that by her knowing that she doesn’t know, she’ll know more than she now knows because she knows she has known knowns and known unknowns.
But what about the unknown unknowns? the stuff she doesn’t know she doesn’t know?
so much about Joyce is exactly like my mom. the hair style and color, as well as being deeply christian yet open minded. she’s even said some of the same things as Joyce here.
But but but… Joyce is like miles from home! Where exactly does she plan on GOING to church?
It would be interesting to see her not have thought about this, but it seems more likely she’s the type to pick a college based on what church it’s near.
Yeah, I live in the bible belt, in an area overwhelmingly baptist, but even here most of the universities don’t have churches (Or any other equivalent.) *on* campus.
Maybe it’s *because* I live in an area that’s overwhelmingly baptist so they assume you’re going to find a baptist church near campus? (Which you can do, if you happen to be baptist.) Sucks if you’re a Catholic, Muslim, or Buddhist though. (Luckily I’m agnostic.)
I was raised christian, never really sure of the denomination, it never came up. Personally, the more I flexed my faith muscles, the more holes got poked in the story. The more church I attended the less I believed, and around middle school, while at summer church camp, I took the time to actually read the bible. After about a month I was done and I was an atheist.
It’s best to take another look now that you have more experience. I’d recommend starting with perhaps Lewis’ Mere Christianity or The Abolition of Man.
Honestly, I’ve never gotten why people feel that just merely reading the Bible will tell you everything you need to know about faith. That certainly isn’t in the Bible itself.
I never really liked the idea of faith, even as a kid. I saw the blind, unwavering devotion to something despite any evidence or lack there of to be quite disturbing.
But it wasn’t just the bible that did it. At the time I was already way out of the religious loop. Reading the bible from cover to cover gave me all the information I needed to be sure that I didn’t believe in any of it.
I asked a lot of questions when I was younger, still do, and I haven’t found a religion yet that stands up to the scrutiny I give it. Faith is about belief, and I don’t have a shred of belief in any of it. I also lack the fear of non-existence that drives so many into the arms of religion. But that’s my take on it, and to each their own.
As far as I see it, unless I become terrified of death being the end, and need comfort from an invisible man in the sky, I’ll be an atheist until the day I die and cease to be.
In my case, I describe myself as an atheist because I’m fairly certain that no deity exists, but this position will change if I’m ever given compelling evidence, which to date no religion has managed.
It’s actually possible to be both an agnostic and an atheist simultaneously.
If you’re both it just means that you’re not 100% positive that no gods or goddesses exist, but you think it’s unlikely enough to not believe that any do exist.
That actually describes most atheists, and is called “soft atheism”, as opposed to “hard atheism” where you’ve ruled out the possibility of any gods existing.
For what its worth, it matters how people define themselves. Calling yourself an Atheist implies something slightly different than an Agnostic; Perhaps the positions overlap, but its still polite to respect what people choose to call themselves.
An then, there is the apathetic agnostics[me], who thinks along the lines of “Maybe there is a god, maybe not, I don’t know for sure the answer. But it actually doesn’t make any difference, as long as I try not to be a complete jerk”
How about people like me, who haven’t quite ruled out the existence of a “higher power,” but haven’t seen anything to make them think that there might be?
@Carlos – “There’s no way of knowing, for a fact, whether or not there is a god”
How could there not be a way of knowing if he existed if he existed? I mean, if he DID exist, he could confirm his existence to everyone with barely an effort. And if half the stuff in the bible were true, he didn’t seem the least bit reticent about doing exactly that on a regular basis. To state that “There is no way of knowing” is a positive knowledge statement – how could you possibly know for certain whether or not it’s possible to know? Especially when the most common definitions of god describe a being that most certainly could prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that he exists?
Now it IS true that there is no way to positively confirm that god does NOT exist. Just like you can’t prove that leprechauns don’t exist. But that doesn’t stop people like me, who lack a belief in a deity, from calling ourselves atheists.
what if he existed, and died? or took a break? or started another project on another planet? i believe a god exists or existed. i think organized religion is ridiculous, and i believe time spent arguing or trying to convince other people of your views is pointless unless you’re paid to do it.
Sorry for the late response. Been out of the loop for a while.
If you are still interested:
The thing is, a given really powerfull creature would have ways of proving it’s really powerfull, like performing a miracle ressurection in front of my eyes. that still wouldn’t prove it’s [a] god. It would just prove it can ressurect the dead.
There is nothing [a] God could do (sort of changing who I am) that would prove beyond any doubt he’s [a] God.
God has not made public claims for anything that has happened in the least 2,000 years or so. Unless He sends out a press release, I will remain agnostic.
Okay, I’ve always had a two-sided argument on this with myself. Even now that faith is a smaller part of my life, I will still occasionally return to this argument like a dog chasing his own damn tail.
Side 1: Christians SHOULD go to church. After all, you’re showing your devotion to your faith and your ideals. You’re not afraid to have the discipline to get up early on a weekend and devote a few hours or so of your life COMPLETELY to your faith. That’s how much it means to you, and that really shows.
Side 2: It means NOTHING to go to church. Literally ANYONE can do it. It doesn’t prove you’re a better person, just that you can get up in the morning. Most of the people there aren’t intellectually practicing and thinking about their faith, hell, most are just there to either make themselves feel better about their spiritual condition, ask for forgiveness for what they did on Saturday night, or both. Your time will probably be much better spent in personal prayer or something.
Seriously. I stopped going because I felt guilty for falling asleep mid-service. I wasn’t taking it seriously. I wasn’t truly honoring the God I worshiped. And now, if I DO go, my beliefs will greatly differ from those everyone else at any church has.
As for the strip, Billie should go simply because she promised Joyce she would. And she no doubt will.
Going to church is really supposed to be more than going there, sitting there and then go home. Church is actually supposed to be also for meeting and discussing with other people with the same interests (faith) as you, somewhat similar to chess or book clubs, tabletop role playing groups or anime and game conventions.
Though I guess there are quite a few churches where they fail to fulfill this role, being just another place where people sit and wait for the sermon to end. Kinda sad.
Hebrews 10:24-25 “24 And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds, 25 not giving up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but encouraging one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching.”
That’s supposed to be the purpose of church meeting, as mandated by the New Testament bible. If your church does that then I don’t see how you can call it a waste. If they don’t then yeah you are wasting your time and I’d find another church.
Matthew 6, verses 5 & 6 (apologies for the KJV, as I know it’s not popular anymore, but it’s what I was raised on):
“And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
“But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.”
Basically, better to pray in a closet and mean it, than to put in your appearance at church just so everyone else knows how holy you are.
Billie is pretty much me except I’m Jewish. I believe God is someone with a fairly mortal-like personality–“made us in his image”, and all that–and probably finds getting up early to listen to the same thing once a week as tedious as I do, especially compounded by millennia.
Hell, buying into the “it’s not your words, it’s your thoughts and feelings” argument only makes showing up seem more pointless. I can think and feel just fine at home at a later hour, thanks.
So, it looks like I accidentally correlated “I’m Jewish” and “I believe God is someone with a fairly mortal-like personality”. I don’t believe that’s a Jewish belief so much as something my mind cooked up.
Thinking that God is just as fallible as the rest of us makes me feel much better about life in general. Not sure why.
Actually, I’ve heard a lecture about how there’s denomination (or something?) of Judaism that believes that God’s personality IS mortal-like. It’s not the most popular sect, but it’s definitely out there.
It’s called Kabbalah its not a sect but rather Jewish Mysticism it arose in the middle ages there is different forms of Kabbalah such as Luranic and traditional Kabbalah, also the Hassidics believe in form of Kabbalah . Kabbalah today what you see the celebrities practicing is not a kin to the traditional kabbalah, Traditional Kabbalah tries to explain the immortal creator with the mortal humans i don’t have the time or patience to go over the entirety of Kabbalah (hopefully some one else will) but traditional Kabbalah does associate god with human aspects such as head arms even gives measurements to these the mortal through his or her actions keeps god must keep god in balance in order to keep god in balance one must follow the laws of Judaism when you sin you bring god out of balance when you preform mitvot you maintain the balance (this is a an extremely simplified version of what traditional Kabbalah is)
to clarify as was not very clear in the one sentence or actually many of my sentences sorry, Kabbalah is the attempt to explain what the mortal worshipers relationship is with the immortal creator also it is not a denomination rather it is a part of Judaism not so much today (exception being Hasidism) but it was very relevant with medieval Judaism
and my dyslexia strikes again i spiked the word personality and just read mortal and like I dont know what denomination this is. and i just made an ass of myself giving a very brief overview of kabbalah
Judaism and the idea of what is god can either be extremely complex or really simple. There’s not really a good answer to the question what do Jews think god is.
The problem with Jews is that you can’t get one answer.
Someone once asked my family whether or not Judasim had a Hell.
My mother said, “Yes, of course we have a Hell.”
I said, “There is a place where demons are from, but people don’t go there.”
My brother said, “No, we do not have a Hell.”
…
After a long pause, my mom told him, “And we’re all right, because Jews don’t agree on anything.”
My Hebrew school is fairly consistent about this, actually: There’s mention of something that could be interpreted as an afterlife, but we don’t have anything solid to go on. I should probably read the Torah and Talmud myself to confirm but both are just so long…
“The problem with Jews is that you can’t get one answer.”
Well, yes, but it’s also kind of nice that we can see and appreciate our own differences. When I talk to other Jews (and, of course, this is just my own personal experience) about bible interpretations we never agree, but we always end up saying something like, “Oh, that’s interesting, I never saw it that way. I still prefer my idea, but I may or may not take bits of your idea and evolve my own.” That’s actually quite fun.
I’m Christian but I find the whole bible to be an extension of man’s arrogance. Because only the son of God who looks like man can save the whole universe? It just screams arrogance.
Unfortunately my views, as both my parents, who are both pastors, almost make me a heretic. Oh well.
How exactly are you a Christian then? If you think the Bible itself is wrong (including the parts where Jesus says no one gets into Heaven except through him), it sounds like you just believe in God. Or at least a god.
To support the idea of not going to church here are some quotes:
“That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. That is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation”
—Talmud, Shabbat 31a
Also presenting another argument for not going to church i present a quote from a philosopher who’s philosophies i do not whole heartily endorse. a man who claimed at the end of his life to be the anti Christ, although i think he may have not been thinking straight because wither a brain tumor or syphilis, Your friend and mine the 19th century German Philosopher Fredrick Nietzsche
“I cannot believe in a God who wants to be praised all the time.”
Yes i am aware i followed a quote from a religious text with a quote from a man who seemingly loathed religion in general. I do not mean to provoke and philosophical argument, about religion Niezche or the Cogito ergo sum, I just feel that either of these quotes could be used to justify Billie’s reasoning for not going to church. However her justification of wanting to get more sleep is probably a better justification, then utilizing pretentious quotes.
The Lord spoke to Moses, saying, “Avenge the Israelite people on the Midianites; then you shall be gathered to your kin.” Moses spoke to the people, saying, “Let men be picked out from among you for a campaign, and let them fall upon Midian to wreak the Lord’s vengeance on Midian. You shall dispatch on the campaign a thousand from every one of the tribes of Israel.” So a thousand from each tribe were furnished from the divisions of Israel, twelve thousand picked for the campaign. Moses dispatched them on the campaign, a thousand from each tribe, with Phinehas son of Eleazar serving as a priest on the campaign, equipped with the sacred utensils and the trumpets for sounding the blasts. They took the field against Midian, as the Lord had commanded Moses, and slew every male. Along with their other victims, they slew the kings of Midian: Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba, the five kings of Midian. They also put Balaam son of Beor to the sword.
The Israelites took the women and children of the Midianites captive, and seized as booty all their beasts, all their herds, and all their wealth. And they destroyed by fire all the towns in which they were settled, and their encampments. They gathered all the spoil and all the booty, man and beast, and they brought the captives, the booty, and the spoil to Moses, Eleazar the priest, and the whole Israelite community, at the camp in the steppes of Moab, at the Jordan near Jericho. Moses, Eleazar the priest, and all the chieftains of the community came out to meet them outside the camp. Moses became angry with the commanders of the army, the officers of thousands and the officers of hundreds, who had come back from the military campaign. Moses said to them, “You have spared every female! Yet they are the very ones who, at the bidding of Balaam, induced the Israelites to trespass against the Lord in the matter of Peor, so that the Lord’s community was struck by the plague. Now, therefore, slay every male among the children, and slay also every woman who has known a man carnally; but spare every young woman who has not had carnal relations with a man.
…well, good they cleared that one up.
It’s a nice idea, but it’s strictly a post-captivity one.
No, it’s internally consistent as long as you realize you and the old testament have different definitions about who counts as a person. In the old testament, person was a category that excluded Midianites.
“I’m sorry. Was that wrong? Are you… not a lesbian?”
“Gnngh. Wrong, yes. But of course I’m a lesbian. Gay bars are just a waste of time. I like girls and everything. Who the hell doesn’t, really?”
“Dorothy doesn’t.”
“Weird.”
“So then are you someone who believes it’s preferable to have a more intimate, one-on-one relationship with a woman rather than mindlessly sleep around?”
“I’m someone who believes it’s preferable to sleep in on Sunday.”
Wow, Billie never struck me as being Christian at all. As a Christian myself, I have my own struggles with worldly things, but she needs to get it together.
Weird?! It’s one thing to be feared and hated, that’s all well and good, but to be completely under somebody’s radar is kind of insulting.
This comic is curious to me because it paints both characters in a strange light: Billie becomes insulated against a rather massive chunk of reality to be unaware of atheists – and simultaneously portrays a bizarre lackadaisical approach to theism that I don’t know that I’ve ever seen before in person. She doesn’t even seem to be doing the usual Sunday lip service – though I suppose she might once she wakes up. And Joyce seems bizarrely aware and accepting of the position that her own churchgoing habit might be rote and pointless. I suppose she might be quoting something she heard on the internet (the parts of it I’d expect her to actually be at even: christian forums), but she seems awfully matter-of-fact about it. Even taking into account how calmly she’s taken everything non-boy-related she’s encountered so far; nothing gets a Christian’s back up like dissing their theological habits.
Regardless: waiting curiously for further installments.
From personal experience, Joyce’s response makes strong sense to me. She’s spent a very large time of her life so far at church and with other religious people. So did I, and even within those seemingly limited (from the outside perspective) parameters, you get a lot of discussion about doctrine and creeds and whatnot. Because being Christian is very important to devout Christians, these sort of nitty gritty topics get debated constantly. Is it okay not to go to church? Are works good enough for salvation? Can people be unsaved? These were frequent topics, sometimes argued heatedly amongst people I hung around with or looked up to. And it was all within the same church, which ostensibly believed in the exact same thing.
And so Joyce’s response in this comic doesn’t seem off to me. She’s trying to get a feel for what angle Billie’s coming from. Her only mistake is believing Billie cares as much as she does.
Sure, I can certainly see her being aware of the opposing position; it’s the way that she proactively offers the description of her own approach as “mindless”, apparently without sarcasm, that surprises me. At her politest I’d have expected her to paint both positions in a good light, not to blithely attack herself in her effort to portray the other position.
Of course, I *am* overthinking this; Joyce’s innocent naivete and admirable tendency to be accepting of other people’s worldviews (once the shock wears off) justifies almost any comment. It just seemed weird to me, is all.
I think Joyce may be repeating a belief that someone else has shared with her, rather than attaching negativity to the activity of routinely attending church. Yes?
Our catholic schooling encouraged us to think about this approach, the idea being that you were supposed to test your faith, by asking questions. On the other hand, simply going through the motions of attending mass & saying the words, was akin to worshipping false idols.
Not really a good marketing angle, though…
Almost all of the questions that are asked can be easily answered by actually READING the Bible and not just being a once a week Christian. For example, when it comes to works, they will not get you into heaven. No amount of good works will get you into heaven. This is not an opinion, it is pretty much the main theme of the New Testament. Just read Ephesians 2:8.
I think the main problem with this debate is the attitude that life is all just one big get-into-heaven game.
If god gave me, you and every other human life just to put us all through some spiritual test (that relies on some very specific beliefs to win) then firstly, an awful lot of people in history didn’t get a chance to get the memo, and secondly wouldn’t it be easier just to attend church a couple of times, say whatever magic words make you ‘win’ and then pay someone to shoot you?
I’m pretty sure god gave me life so I could love, grow, be challenged, bring happiness to people, suffer, get to know god better, build things, destroy things, eat things, make more people and eventually die. Life’s awesome (and sometimes it sucks). Why would god have made it so if it didn’t matter?
Theists love to make fun of fundies, but all they are is theists who believe in God in the sense one believes in anything else, rather than the empty compartmentalization that lets you believe in God while typing on a computer designed for a clockwork universe, and ignoring everything the ancients said about him that especially doesn’t make sense.
The correct grammar is “all they are are”. I only mention this because it sounds and looks wrong, and thus is awesome. (Plus, word repetition is awesome.)
Also, fundamentalists ignore just as much as anyone else; the main difference is that the worldview they choose to embrace is more dissonant with observable reality than others. And/or they are louder and/or more self-righteous about it. They are not adhering closer to the text, because the text(s) in question are too large and lack sufficient internal consistency to create a consistent worldview based off of them without ignoring and/or “interpreting” various large parts. This unavoidably forces all adherents to either craft their own religion based on personally selecting/interpreting/ignoring various parts of the text, or to accept somebody else’s interpretation (to the degree they understand that person or organization’s interpretation). And from where I’m standing way over here to the left, this results in there being little or no reason to grant any one interpretation credibility over another – aside from the degree to which their interpretation conflicts with interpretable reality, of course (but that’s a separate issue).
Fundamentalism is believing in the core teachings of a religion but disregarding what is no longer relevant and doing your best to turn a millenia-old book into something that works for modern day. In that sense I myself am fundamentalist. Am I a bigot? No, I’m a lesbian, why would I hate myself? Do I believe in gender inequality? No, I’m a woman and I wouldn’t short myself, and I’m a good person and wouldn’t short others.
The Bible is a book written by a lot of different people, and some of it isn’t relevant anymore, some of it never really was in the first place because it’s a recollection of old laws and not of the Lord’s true will, some of it is literally true, some of it is true but in a different sense – worldwide flood is impossible, but a person’s “world” back then wouldn’t have been far without modern transportation or technology – and most of it is bringing out a point through metaphors. So obviously it’s hard to decipher.
There’s a gay liberal fairly traditional Christian view on it. Am I bothered by atheists? Not at all! Well, there’s a really frickin annoying vocal minority, most of whom are very rude and mean to me, but we Christians have a savage vocal minority too and it’s a lot bigger, and they’re rude and mean to me too, so yeah, can’t judge you on that. XP All I’m saying is don’t look at the crazy people on the news, maybe even in your town, and think that’s all of us.
Discarding part of the religion to adapt it to the modern day is pretty much the opposite of fundamentalism. With fundamentalism you get back to the fundamentals – that is to say, you adhere to as much of the original form of the religion as you can. It’s a reaction to the average religion’s tendency to change and adapt over time.
This also explains it’s tendency to lag behind scientific discovery and actively go to war with it: science says that a first-century worldview is false; those who are trying to get back to the first-century worldview reject the science.
Could it be that Joyce is actually learning something about the faith of others?
My mom raised me Catholic growing up, but she always told me that one doesn’t need to go to church to feel close to God. For her, she always told my brother and I that God was in everything, thus he was always with us. I always liked that idea towards faith.
Well… Yes. Sometimes. Take someone in my situation.. I live in an area called the Bible Belt, and for some reason the few times I go out of those circles I still meet Christians. Given my experience, it is safe for me to assume someone is a christian. Since Billie doesn’t seem to overly-analytic she might have simply never questioned that assumption.
Actually, yes. Most of the people I’ve met who are Christian, can’t seem to get their heads around the fact that there are plenty of people in this country who aren’t (Barring atheists, of course. But they don’t count because they’re obviously doing the devil’s work.).
I mean, of course Middle Easterners are Muslim, and people from India are Hindu. But Americans? They’re Christian, of course.
Its more common than you might think. People tend to generalize their own experience for others. As someone who was raised religious but remained mostly apathetic about the subject, the idea that someone might not actually believe in some kind of God never occurred to me, even though I knew that people like Buddhists existed.
My church has these awesome seats that are really cushony but flat with a back and they fit together so you could easily sleep on them quite comfortably.
My Mum’s church recently replaced all their pews with nice chairs. It’s a vast improvement.
Although it is possible to argue the existence of many valid interpretations of the Christian ‘God’, on the whole the crux of religious belief is ‘faith’. ‘Faith’ is, according to the Oxford Online Dictionary, ‘strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof’. This is obviously not a logically sound attitude, but it becomes logically sound when the spiritual conviction defies explanation – if I was to somehow become convinced of any theist concepts without obvious attempts at psychological manipulation or psychological impairment, then I would take the very fact of my conviction as justification for that conviction. My problem is when people take their beliefs and try to force them into a mould, thereby expanding and corrupting their personal principles with no justification whatsoever – this is essentially voluntary brainwashing. Of course, if the God that you believe in as a matter of personal conviction and not through the teachings of others would require you to regularly submit to regular testimonies by potentially misguided humans, based on outdated texts, which that God would have dictated himself to human scribes, then by all means go to whatever your chosen church is… but it seems to me that this must usually be the ‘mindless’ option, as Joyce describes it, in which the churchgoer risks perverting their religious beliefs by conforming to a mainstream view while the basis and nature of their belief is entirely independent of this view.
This is my attitude, and sounds quite like the one that Joyce speculates for Billie, but I don’t know why this is acceptable within the boundaries of ‘Christianity’ when it runs contrary to many of the things that organised religion stands for.
On an unrelated note, about half of my friends are atheist and the other half are Catholic. This has never really caused any tensions – but no-one ever talks about their religious beliefs among people of differing beliefs, except sometimes by accident.
Um, convictions don’t become more logical when they start defying logical explanation. Obviously. That doesn’t work for 911 truthers and it doesn’t work for christians – and it doesn’t work for atheists either, for that matter. If you want your beliefs to be logical, stick to what makes sense based on observable reality. If you want to believe in the illogical and/or unconfirmable, do so if you must, but don’t attempt to conflate the two, because it simply doesn’t work. (And you really shouldn’t try to set yourself above the ‘mindless’ churchgoers based on your presumed, incorrect, logical superiority. It doesn’t make you look good.)
As for Joyce, I get the impression that she thinks that there is one Christian God, and that it’s pretty much impossible to be too wrong in how you worship him, because (as a conscious entity that actually exists and interacts with people) he would correct wrongheaded people and rectify their erroneous beliefs and behavior. That is to say, I doubt she believes there’s any way at all to be both Christian and brainwashed. Most likely she believes that attending church is a good thing to do (because God says so) and that it’s impossible to get ‘perverted’ information there, but if you don’t go and are still Christian you’re still mostly on the right path. Your rather exclusionary and critical view of other people’s beliefs would probably be rather foreign to her, between and among Christians anyway.
I was sticking to what makes sense based on observable reality; I was just using a posteriori reasoning – deducing the cause by observing the effect. The manifestation of ‘spiritual convictions’ must have some cause, and in the absence of any other explanation a subconscious knowledge of the truth of those convictions is, to me, an acceptable deduction, if not one that can be proven. I am not saying that this logically ‘proves’ the existence of God – it is simply a logically sound basis for the belief in God, whereas any other reason for belief that I can think of is not logical in nature by any means. I think when I referred to convictions ‘defying logical explanation’ was referring to the fact that no known causes could produce the effect, rather than the fact that no cause could produce the effect. It was poorly phrased, but I thought my meaning became clear through the argument.
The nature of this basis, however, leads to an individual approach to religion – one which is based on one’s personal convictions, and not on ‘education’ by others. A good church may help individuals to explore their own convictions, but in my experience it is also likely to force one’s beliefs into a particular shape – and if the God perceived before subjecting the psyche to religious teachings is real, then to potentially alter one’s understanding of Him according to the religious teachings of others who have no guarantee to understand Him equally well is a tremendous risk.
Any point of view that one believes to be right is necessarily exclusionary – because one is either right or wrong. Maybe occasionally a mixture of the two, but usually polarised.
As for the critical aspect, it could be a lot worse. Many atheists take the lack of logical foundation for religious belief and conclude ‘All religious people are stupid.’ I take the same problem and conclude ‘Most religious people would do better to take a more individual approach to their beliefs’.
So your argument is, basically, 1) “In the absence of any other explanation, my religious experience most probably came from a divine source”, and 2) “No other approach for deducing the existence of a god is sound.”
Regarding statement 1, the tricky part is finding a religious experience that cannot be otherwise explained, particularly when you introduce an Occam’s Razor-style approach to weighing the credibility of solutions. God theories tend to be incredible, in both senses of the word, so virtually any other explanation comes off as more likely from a reasonably objective assessment. Up to and including the subject of the experience being a full-fledged lunatic – though in practical terms it’s quite rare that one needs to go that far to explain anything, since the sane human mind is a wild and wonderful place full of both great imaginative capacity and also a host of biases and filters and logical failings that likely proved quite useful when we were trying to avoid the saber-toothed tigers, but sometimes lead to erroneous conclusions. Humans see patterns everywhere, after all.
I feel obliged to mention that given a sufficiently unimpeachable proof, I myself would immediately convert – to belief in the entity’s existence, anyway. Most likely anything like that would require massively redundant video evidence, but it’s certainly theoretically possible. (Dying and awakening to see…nearly anything…would work too.) My response would not be a Christians, but real proof would sway me. Anything that might be in my head alone wouldn’t.
Regarding point 2…I agree! There are no good arguments for gods. However there are at least a few that are as good as your argument, arguably including “my mommy told me so and she wouldn’t lie.” Who are you to call their mom a liar, eh? Also there are some complex logical arguments, that can take a heck of a lot of work to sort out the errors therein even if you know what you’re doing. (Admittedly none of those point to a specific god, but let’s not quibble over details.)
As for the exclusionary-ness, religions and sects vary widely as to what they include; there’s nothing about having a position that necessitates that all other positions be false, especially when they are as co-similar as the various Christian beliefs. (Heck, they share a label!) Your take on Christianity seems atypically exclusionary to me for a Christian, since it seems to basically be “Everyone other than me is wrong”. (None of them share your experiences and exact beliefs, after all.) That’s pretty impressive by exclusionary standards, really – it puts mere rejection of the Catholics to shame.
A lot of atheists do consider all religious people to be stupid; I did too for a while, a while ago. I think it’s sort of a phase that atheists go through. It’s not correct, despite there seeming to be compelling evidence for it, and it certainly isn’t a productive theory. Nowadays I’m a firm believer in compartmentalism: smart people can certainly be mistaken, and if one holds tight to a mistaken belief long enough their mind starts to take steps to protect the belief. They can and do literally turn off their logic when it comes to the subject, if necessary; I’ve seen it happen. It’s pretty amazing (and a little scary) in persons who are otherwise overtly very intelligent, who discard all reason when you challenge something they hold dear. (My dad’s old college roommate was Steve Jones, the 911 truther. A college professor. Until he destroyed his reputation and career, anyway…)
I wouldn’t say that all athiests (And, if agnostics count, agnostics.) believe or have ever believed religious people are stupid.
See, here’s my thoughts on why people believe the things they do. People do so because they *want to,* because that’s what they’re comforable with, and frequenty that happens to be the beliefs they were raised with. I think that applies to both the religious and the irreligious.
Obvious example: The idea of God, of an all-knowing benevolent being who makes sure that ultimately, life *is* fair is an appealing idea. Death is a scary thing. Loss is a scary thing. Heck, even life can be a scary thing. So yeah, I can understand why someone is willing to believe in something like that without evidence. And if it makes them happy then I can’t say it’s in any way stupid.
But don’t get the wrong impression. I think the same can be said of athiests: I think that athiests don’t believe in got because they would be uncomfortable believing in god. There are a number of possible reasons for this, that appeal both to rationality and emotion. Some people, like myself, just can’t have faith in something if they can’t find any evidence to support its existence. I mean, seriously, I can’t. It would fly in the face of some of the principles that I have based my life around. On the emotional side, there is a positive side to existentialism. “Hey, humans can give their own purpose to life.”
I’m not saying those specific examples are indicative of the majority of the religious are the irrelgious, but I stand by my idea that ultimately people just believe what they want, and thus no belief has any sort of moral superiority over any other.
ah, religion. my dad is atheist, but my mum is christain (and the daughter of a vicar to boot). so which do i beleive in?
why, i took a third option and worship discordanism of course! pope cards for everyone! unless your greyface.
so much about Joyce is exactly like my mom. the hair style and color, as well as being deeply christian yet open minded. she’s even said some of the same things as Joyce here.
Church, smurch. Bokonon rightly tells us that all churches are granfalloons, dispensing pure foma. And as Bokonon says:
“If you wish to study a granfalloon,
Just remove the skin of a toy balloon.”
Worship is properly carried out by two people pressing the soles of their feet together. And for further reading, I refer you to the fourteenth Book of Bokonon, Chapter One.
I’m a Christian, but I have animist/theist tendencies; I tend to treat mass as a guided meditation. It’s something that I do regularly for my own spiritual health, but I don’t consider the day and time to have any real significance. I’m just used to being up early on Sunday mornings, so it’s usually convenient to me (and I can grab lunch and groceries on the way home).
It’s like shaving; I can certainly skip a day if I have reason to (like if some idiot production coordinator schedules two 16-hour shoot days with no turnaround), but I end up looking and feeling like a mess.
Of course, I also accept that the Church-as-organization is essentially a political entity, with all the inherent flaws that that suggest. It may have been founded with the best of intentions, but, in order to carry out spiritual work, it needs to amass worldly power (you can’t help the poor unless you have power, and you have no power without money), and power/authority/wealth inevitably attracts the corruptable.
I also try form my own understanding of God whenever possible; even if it flies in the face of traditional Church doctrine (when Jesus says one thing [“Love thy neighbours”] and the Pope says something else [“Teh Gays are destroying the Family!!!”], I tend to follow Jesus).
(The guy hung out with tax collectors, lepers, deserters, foreigners, slaves, and prostiutes. If Jesus was here, he’d probably be performing gay weddings.)
I like your attitude. Of course, I also like the fact that I’m participating in a discussion about religion on the internet, with people of varying beliefs, and no one has flamed anyone yet.
I’m interested to see where this goes. Especially if Dorothy makes good on her “I’ll do anything to make it up to you” comment from the other day and attends church. I’m curious to see what kind of atheist she is. I would hope, given her attitude about everything else, that she’s given it serious thought and concluded in her disbelief for strong philosophical reasons, but I’m kinda used to being disappointed in fictional atheists.
I would be astonished if she went back on her word, too; she’s going to that church. (Once.) Though I would also be unsurprised if she kept her trap shut the entire time she was there; this is the sane way to avoid pointless conflict (unless you’re entertained by conflict), but it might interfere with you learning much about her reasons for pursuing the path she does.
I actually like Billy’s reasoning as far as Church goes. I, too, and a Christian that believes. I also don’t think that attending Church does anything special really, as long as you believe. I also drink, curse, and had per-marital hanky panky, but does that make me a horrible sinner, I don’t think it does.
Plus, a lot of people at my Church are stuck up and look down on people if they aren’t completely “God is Law!” so I tend to work on Sundays. I have my belief, I don’t need someone in a suit to tell me how I should believe in that belief 🙂
Loading ...
A belief I heartily endorse.
Seconded
Hell, I believe it’s better to sleep in every day. I like sleeping.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OemNp6hgX4
Sleep is God, go worship.
“intimate, one-on-one fellowship”?
bow chika wow wow
Since Sarah is the Old Testament God, does that count as a new ship for Billie?
BilliexOldTestament!Sarah.
I am strangely okay with this.
I knew you would buddy, I knew you would, 😀
Should it worry me that people on the Internet know me better than people in my everyday life do?
(Also, I accidentally bought the wrong kind of cookies. I like them, but not as much as the kind I wanted to get. Is it worth going out in 39 degrees F weather and take a 30 minute trip [one-way] to a store that closes in a little less than an hour in order to buy my preferred cookies, or should I just be grateful I like the cookies I bought?)
Eat all the cookies!
In other words, just stay inside like the lazy bastard I am? Okay.
Eat the cookies, then go back out
(39 degrees isn’t too terrible… it’s -37 Celcius where I am) =)
Fun fact: -40 C is the same as -40 F!
Another Fun Fact: People who think 39 F is cold would be considered wusses where I come from, and told to put their spring jackets on 😛
Amen.
It is also in and around -30C in my area. And I am not a wuss.
I would kill for 3 degrees right now, actually. (which is what the internet tells me 39F is. Hell if I know. I speak Canuck, not that-other-place.
Me toooo. 🙁
Why, Canada? WHY MUST YOU BE SO COLD??? I, er, I mean, uh… oh look, time to go wrestle a polar bear. Because as a Canadian I am of course impervious to all cold down to -63c. Or something. Yeah, that. *shifty eyes*
@Kernanator: While I cannot claim to know what kind of person you are IRL, I am reasonably familar with your Kernanator persona in regards to commenting style, which why I could predict to some extent your likely respones to certain comments.
And one day Plasma Mongoose will use this to seal you in an insidious death maze.
SHHHHHH! Don’t spill the beans!
it’s 39 degrees F up/down/left/right/circle/square/triangle/up/up/down/circle there? Seriously? Time to break out the shorts. not the short shorts yet, but…..
HEAT WAVE!!!!!
Well, it’s warm out, there. But a 30 minute drive when you already have cookies is just plain dumb, even in the best weather. Unless you’re buying it from somebody attractive, who you might have a shot with.
Billie: The face that launched a million ships.
Joyce’s creepy smile yesterday was the destroyer of a thousand minds.
JoycexBilly: Launching a million mind destroying ships
The Intimate One-on-One Fellowship of the Rings
I think thats one Fellowship of the Purity Rings?
I want to give panel 3 Joyce a hug.
I would have just said yes.
If church could cure hangovers, Billie would be much more interested in going.
Although, depending on her denomination, she might get a sip of Hair Of The Dog during the service.
I’m none of your damn buisness.
I’m someone who believes it is preferable to sleep in one’s own bed rather than in a church pew during services.
Yeah, if you sleep in a church pew, you end up looking like a hobo.
Besides, pews are uncomfortable.
Yeah, they aren’t fluffeh enuff.
Most of the churches I attended while growing up were entirely wood. Fluffeh? What’s that? Splinter is something I was very familiar with.
Seriously? How is the old rat?
My dad used to fall asleep in church all the time and give himself whiplash, so his friend suggested that he sit in the back pew where he could rest his head against the wall. Unfortunately he still jerked his head back as he was falling asleep, and hit his head on the wall so hard it disturbed the whole service.
And Joyce keeps learning about the outside world, yay
She seems to have a better grasp than Billie.
And she’s asking questions to help her understand the parts she doesn’t get! She’s ignorant, but she knows she is and ignorance you know about is fixable.
So she doesn’t know, but she knows that she doesn’t know, and you know that by her knowing that she doesn’t know, she’ll know more than she now knows because she knows she has known knowns and known unknowns.
But what about the unknown unknowns? the stuff she doesn’t know she doesn’t know?
I’m dizzy…
so much about Joyce is exactly like my mom. the hair style and color, as well as being deeply christian yet open minded. she’s even said some of the same things as Joyce here.
…
I don’t know.
[ducks and runs away]
That was well stated! Mind if I borrow it?
People like Billie (and me) are the reason that churches started having noon services, because God DID ordain a day of rest.
Joyce Gravatar, please stop ruining all of my comments :[
I’m sure Joyce would agree with the sentiment once Billie finishes teaching her the new testament book of Snooze.
Saturday is the day of rest.
But but but… Joyce is like miles from home! Where exactly does she plan on GOING to church?
It would be interesting to see her not have thought about this, but it seems more likely she’s the type to pick a college based on what church it’s near.
Does… your college not have major denomination churches on campus???
Hmmm I didn’t know they had such things.
No, my college had no churches whatsoever.
Yeah, I live in the bible belt, in an area overwhelmingly baptist, but even here most of the universities don’t have churches (Or any other equivalent.) *on* campus.
Maybe it’s *because* I live in an area that’s overwhelmingly baptist so they assume you’re going to find a baptist church near campus? (Which you can do, if you happen to be baptist.) Sucks if you’re a Catholic, Muslim, or Buddhist though. (Luckily I’m agnostic.)
“Luckily”? These agnostic churches are incredibly hard to find around here, I tell you!
That is so weird. We have a Korean church, Temple, a Christian church, and a Catholic church. There’s something else too, but I’ve never been in it
Faith is like a muscle. When not used it atrophies.
Out of the 168 hours of the week God has given each and every person, I don’t find one to be too much to ask as a “thanks” in return.
But why does it have to be so early in the morning?
Because they want you to stop touching yourself at night.
After all,
every sperm is sacred,
every sperm is good,
every sperm is needed,
in your neighbourhood!
That post and that av…
[brain ‘splodey]
This is magnificent.
Every sperm is wanted,
Every sperm is great,
If a sperm gets wasted,
God gets quite irate!
Most parishes I’ve gone to have both morning and evening services. Let’s just say I’m not a chirpy little morning bird either…
I think I may have killed that bird actually…
I was raised christian, never really sure of the denomination, it never came up. Personally, the more I flexed my faith muscles, the more holes got poked in the story. The more church I attended the less I believed, and around middle school, while at summer church camp, I took the time to actually read the bible. After about a month I was done and I was an atheist.
Maybe I just tore a faith muscle from overuse.
Yeah, sounds like you badly sprained your faith.
A sprained faith could easily cascade into a full-blown liturgical aversion. Absent a radical epiphany you’ll probably just have to live with it.
It’s best to take another look now that you have more experience. I’d recommend starting with perhaps Lewis’ Mere Christianity or The Abolition of Man.
Honestly, I’ve never gotten why people feel that just merely reading the Bible will tell you everything you need to know about faith. That certainly isn’t in the Bible itself.
I never really liked the idea of faith, even as a kid. I saw the blind, unwavering devotion to something despite any evidence or lack there of to be quite disturbing.
But it wasn’t just the bible that did it. At the time I was already way out of the religious loop. Reading the bible from cover to cover gave me all the information I needed to be sure that I didn’t believe in any of it.
I asked a lot of questions when I was younger, still do, and I haven’t found a religion yet that stands up to the scrutiny I give it. Faith is about belief, and I don’t have a shred of belief in any of it. I also lack the fear of non-existence that drives so many into the arms of religion. But that’s my take on it, and to each their own.
As far as I see it, unless I become terrified of death being the end, and need comfort from an invisible man in the sky, I’ll be an atheist until the day I die and cease to be.
Yeah, it’s just an hour here, and an hour there, but those nickels and dimes add up.
Atheists are the ones who don’t believe in god, and there are about one billion of us worldwide.
Atheists: “There is no god.”
Agnostics: “I don’t THINK there’s a god.”
Jews: “Well, just in case…”
According to the definition most atheists use, people who say “I don’t THINK there’s a god,” are also atheists.
In my case, I describe myself as an atheist because I’m fairly certain that no deity exists, but this position will change if I’m ever given compelling evidence, which to date no religion has managed.
Agnostics are more, “I don’t know, really.”
It’s not that they don’t think there’s a god. They’re just unsure/neutral.
It’s actually possible to be both an agnostic and an atheist simultaneously.
If you’re both it just means that you’re not 100% positive that no gods or goddesses exist, but you think it’s unlikely enough to not believe that any do exist.
That actually describes most atheists, and is called “soft atheism”, as opposed to “hard atheism” where you’ve ruled out the possibility of any gods existing.
For what its worth, it matters how people define themselves. Calling yourself an Atheist implies something slightly different than an Agnostic; Perhaps the positions overlap, but its still polite to respect what people choose to call themselves.
Agnostic atheism is probably the name you’re looking for.
Not really. Hard agnostics (like me) are more “There’s no way of knowing, for a fact, whether or not there is a god”.
An then, there is the apathetic agnostics[me], who thinks along the lines of “Maybe there is a god, maybe not, I don’t know for sure the answer. But it actually doesn’t make any difference, as long as I try not to be a complete jerk”
How about people like me, who haven’t quite ruled out the existence of a “higher power,” but haven’t seen anything to make them think that there might be?
Casual agnostics – those who think there may or may not be a god but.. Hey, is that cheese over there?
@Carlos – “There’s no way of knowing, for a fact, whether or not there is a god”
How could there not be a way of knowing if he existed if he existed? I mean, if he DID exist, he could confirm his existence to everyone with barely an effort. And if half the stuff in the bible were true, he didn’t seem the least bit reticent about doing exactly that on a regular basis. To state that “There is no way of knowing” is a positive knowledge statement – how could you possibly know for certain whether or not it’s possible to know? Especially when the most common definitions of god describe a being that most certainly could prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that he exists?
Now it IS true that there is no way to positively confirm that god does NOT exist. Just like you can’t prove that leprechauns don’t exist. But that doesn’t stop people like me, who lack a belief in a deity, from calling ourselves atheists.
what if he existed, and died? or took a break? or started another project on another planet? i believe a god exists or existed. i think organized religion is ridiculous, and i believe time spent arguing or trying to convince other people of your views is pointless unless you’re paid to do it.
Sorry for the late response. Been out of the loop for a while.
If you are still interested:
The thing is, a given really powerfull creature would have ways of proving it’s really powerfull, like performing a miracle ressurection in front of my eyes. that still wouldn’t prove it’s [a] god. It would just prove it can ressurect the dead.
There is nothing [a] God could do (sort of changing who I am) that would prove beyond any doubt he’s [a] God.
What about if you don’t believe that God exists but also don’t care if God does exist?
That would make you a Atheistic Nihilist?
Apathetic agnosticism + atheism.
Don’t forget about the Naytheists, they believe that God exists, they just don’t think he should be worshiped.
And the Gaythiests, those brought up to believe in a god that casts all gays into eternal damnation but later learned that they were gay, so fuck him!
Must remember that one for later. 😀
Those jews you speak of better worship Odin, Vishnu and the flying spaghetti monster also. I mean, *just in case*… 😉
*Raises hand* Odin follower here. And Thor, Freya, Frigg, Heimdall, etc etc etc.
Sorry; was feeling left out of the conversation, ha ha ha.
Just in case what? Judaism doesn’t really believe in Heaven or Hell, they believe that G\d will reward them in this life for their faith.
God has not made public claims for anything that has happened in the least 2,000 years or so. Unless He sends out a press release, I will remain agnostic.
^ This.
How do you know he hasn’t? If he were to issue a retraction how would you even know that the original P.R. ever even existed? Hmm? Hmm?
He’s supossed to be perfect. I’m sure he can find a way to not fail miserably.
Well it is a day of rest.
Okay, I’ve always had a two-sided argument on this with myself. Even now that faith is a smaller part of my life, I will still occasionally return to this argument like a dog chasing his own damn tail.
Side 1: Christians SHOULD go to church. After all, you’re showing your devotion to your faith and your ideals. You’re not afraid to have the discipline to get up early on a weekend and devote a few hours or so of your life COMPLETELY to your faith. That’s how much it means to you, and that really shows.
Side 2: It means NOTHING to go to church. Literally ANYONE can do it. It doesn’t prove you’re a better person, just that you can get up in the morning. Most of the people there aren’t intellectually practicing and thinking about their faith, hell, most are just there to either make themselves feel better about their spiritual condition, ask for forgiveness for what they did on Saturday night, or both. Your time will probably be much better spent in personal prayer or something.
Seriously. I stopped going because I felt guilty for falling asleep mid-service. I wasn’t taking it seriously. I wasn’t truly honoring the God I worshiped. And now, if I DO go, my beliefs will greatly differ from those everyone else at any church has.
As for the strip, Billie should go simply because she promised Joyce she would. And she no doubt will.
That was Dorothy, dude.
Going to church is really supposed to be more than going there, sitting there and then go home. Church is actually supposed to be also for meeting and discussing with other people with the same interests (faith) as you, somewhat similar to chess or book clubs, tabletop role playing groups or anime and game conventions.
Though I guess there are quite a few churches where they fail to fulfill this role, being just another place where people sit and wait for the sermon to end. Kinda sad.
Hebrews 10:24-25 “24 And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds, 25 not giving up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but encouraging one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching.”
That’s supposed to be the purpose of church meeting, as mandated by the New Testament bible. If your church does that then I don’t see how you can call it a waste. If they don’t then yeah you are wasting your time and I’d find another church.
Matthew 6, verses 5 & 6 (apologies for the KJV, as I know it’s not popular anymore, but it’s what I was raised on):
“And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
“But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.”
Basically, better to pray in a closet and mean it, than to put in your appearance at church just so everyone else knows how holy you are.
The KJV speaks volumes to me. Better to pray before going to bed than falling asleep during prayer in church.
Billie is pretty much me except I’m Jewish. I believe God is someone with a fairly mortal-like personality–“made us in his image”, and all that–and probably finds getting up early to listen to the same thing once a week as tedious as I do, especially compounded by millennia.
Hell, buying into the “it’s not your words, it’s your thoughts and feelings” argument only makes showing up seem more pointless. I can think and feel just fine at home at a later hour, thanks.
So, it looks like I accidentally correlated “I’m Jewish” and “I believe God is someone with a fairly mortal-like personality”. I don’t believe that’s a Jewish belief so much as something my mind cooked up.
Thinking that God is just as fallible as the rest of us makes me feel much better about life in general. Not sure why.
Actually, I’ve heard a lecture about how there’s denomination (or something?) of Judaism that believes that God’s personality IS mortal-like. It’s not the most popular sect, but it’s definitely out there.
It’s called Kabbalah its not a sect but rather Jewish Mysticism it arose in the middle ages there is different forms of Kabbalah such as Luranic and traditional Kabbalah, also the Hassidics believe in form of Kabbalah . Kabbalah today what you see the celebrities practicing is not a kin to the traditional kabbalah, Traditional Kabbalah tries to explain the immortal creator with the mortal humans i don’t have the time or patience to go over the entirety of Kabbalah (hopefully some one else will) but traditional Kabbalah does associate god with human aspects such as head arms even gives measurements to these the mortal through his or her actions keeps god must keep god in balance in order to keep god in balance one must follow the laws of Judaism when you sin you bring god out of balance when you preform mitvot you maintain the balance (this is a an extremely simplified version of what traditional Kabbalah is)
to clarify as was not very clear in the one sentence or actually many of my sentences sorry, Kabbalah is the attempt to explain what the mortal worshipers relationship is with the immortal creator also it is not a denomination rather it is a part of Judaism not so much today (exception being Hasidism) but it was very relevant with medieval Judaism
and my dyslexia strikes again i spiked the word personality and just read mortal and like I dont know what denomination this is. and i just made an ass of myself giving a very brief overview of kabbalah
Judaism and the idea of what is god can either be extremely complex or really simple. There’s not really a good answer to the question what do Jews think god is.
The problem with Jews is that you can’t get one answer.
Someone once asked my family whether or not Judasim had a Hell.
My mother said, “Yes, of course we have a Hell.”
I said, “There is a place where demons are from, but people don’t go there.”
My brother said, “No, we do not have a Hell.”
…
After a long pause, my mom told him, “And we’re all right, because Jews don’t agree on anything.”
My Hebrew school is fairly consistent about this, actually: There’s mention of something that could be interpreted as an afterlife, but we don’t have anything solid to go on. I should probably read the Torah and Talmud myself to confirm but both are just so long…
“The problem with Jews is that you can’t get one answer.”
Well, yes, but it’s also kind of nice that we can see and appreciate our own differences. When I talk to other Jews (and, of course, this is just my own personal experience) about bible interpretations we never agree, but we always end up saying something like, “Oh, that’s interesting, I never saw it that way. I still prefer my idea, but I may or may not take bits of your idea and evolve my own.” That’s actually quite fun.
I’m Christian but I find the whole bible to be an extension of man’s arrogance. Because only the son of God who looks like man can save the whole universe? It just screams arrogance.
Unfortunately my views, as both my parents, who are both pastors, almost make me a heretic. Oh well.
How exactly are you a Christian then? If you think the Bible itself is wrong (including the parts where Jesus says no one gets into Heaven except through him), it sounds like you just believe in God. Or at least a god.
Sounds like you’ve made god in your own image rather than the other way around.
“We all make God in our own image!”
— Matt Decker (Stephen Collins), “Star Trek: The Motion Picture”
I suppose in that one aspect I have. Ah well.
Panel 1…so…adorable!
Ah, religion…
Let the games begin.
Sleep in on Sundays? That’s my religion too! XD
To support the idea of not going to church here are some quotes:
“That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. That is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation”
—Talmud, Shabbat 31a
Also presenting another argument for not going to church i present a quote from a philosopher who’s philosophies i do not whole heartily endorse. a man who claimed at the end of his life to be the anti Christ, although i think he may have not been thinking straight because wither a brain tumor or syphilis, Your friend and mine the 19th century German Philosopher Fredrick Nietzsche
“I cannot believe in a God who wants to be praised all the time.”
Yes i am aware i followed a quote from a religious text with a quote from a man who seemingly loathed religion in general. I do not mean to provoke and philosophical argument, about religion Niezche or the Cogito ergo sum, I just feel that either of these quotes could be used to justify Billie’s reasoning for not going to church. However her justification of wanting to get more sleep is probably a better justification, then utilizing pretentious quotes.
The Lord spoke to Moses, saying, “Avenge the Israelite people on the Midianites; then you shall be gathered to your kin.” Moses spoke to the people, saying, “Let men be picked out from among you for a campaign, and let them fall upon Midian to wreak the Lord’s vengeance on Midian. You shall dispatch on the campaign a thousand from every one of the tribes of Israel.” So a thousand from each tribe were furnished from the divisions of Israel, twelve thousand picked for the campaign. Moses dispatched them on the campaign, a thousand from each tribe, with Phinehas son of Eleazar serving as a priest on the campaign, equipped with the sacred utensils and the trumpets for sounding the blasts. They took the field against Midian, as the Lord had commanded Moses, and slew every male. Along with their other victims, they slew the kings of Midian: Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba, the five kings of Midian. They also put Balaam son of Beor to the sword.
The Israelites took the women and children of the Midianites captive, and seized as booty all their beasts, all their herds, and all their wealth. And they destroyed by fire all the towns in which they were settled, and their encampments. They gathered all the spoil and all the booty, man and beast, and they brought the captives, the booty, and the spoil to Moses, Eleazar the priest, and the whole Israelite community, at the camp in the steppes of Moab, at the Jordan near Jericho. Moses, Eleazar the priest, and all the chieftains of the community came out to meet them outside the camp. Moses became angry with the commanders of the army, the officers of thousands and the officers of hundreds, who had come back from the military campaign. Moses said to them, “You have spared every female! Yet they are the very ones who, at the bidding of Balaam, induced the Israelites to trespass against the Lord in the matter of Peor, so that the Lord’s community was struck by the plague. Now, therefore, slay every male among the children, and slay also every woman who has known a man carnally; but spare every young woman who has not had carnal relations with a man.
…well, good they cleared that one up.
It’s a nice idea, but it’s strictly a post-captivity one.
No, it’s internally consistent as long as you realize you and the old testament have different definitions about who counts as a person. In the old testament, person was a category that excluded Midianites.
They seized their breasts as booty? That’s just ass backwards.
change the word christian for lesbian, was hilarious xD
You’re right, that is funny.
“I’m sorry. Was that wrong? Are you… not a lesbian?”
“Gnngh. Wrong, yes. But of course I’m a lesbian. Gay bars are just a waste of time. I like girls and everything. Who the hell doesn’t, really?”
“Dorothy doesn’t.”
“Weird.”
“So then are you someone who believes it’s preferable to have a more intimate, one-on-one relationship with a woman rather than mindlessly sleep around?”
“I’m someone who believes it’s preferable to sleep in on Sunday.”
I reject this game because it involves Dorothy not being interested in girls.
It -does- seem to imply Joyce is disappointed in this, mind you, which appeals to my Joyrathy shipping, but just the same!
you got that right out of my mind lol
Wow, Billie never struck me as being Christian at all. As a Christian myself, I have my own struggles with worldly things, but she needs to get it together.
Billie isn’t interesting enough to have thought to be something OTHER than what she was raised. 😛
This kind of judgmental nonsense is at the core of this strip’s criticism of religion.
Arguing with you would be pointless, so let’s just agree to disagree.
Billie looks like a pale Sal in panel 2 to me.
I’m loving Joyce here. She’s just so innocent and nice about her faith. Well-done, and very very awesome, Mr. Willis. 🙂
…dammit, Joe-gravatar, stop ruining my intended tone.
Too late. Now you’re Joe delivering those lines on your knees from behind/in Joyce.
Weird?! It’s one thing to be feared and hated, that’s all well and good, but to be completely under somebody’s radar is kind of insulting.
This comic is curious to me because it paints both characters in a strange light: Billie becomes insulated against a rather massive chunk of reality to be unaware of atheists – and simultaneously portrays a bizarre lackadaisical approach to theism that I don’t know that I’ve ever seen before in person. She doesn’t even seem to be doing the usual Sunday lip service – though I suppose she might once she wakes up. And Joyce seems bizarrely aware and accepting of the position that her own churchgoing habit might be rote and pointless. I suppose she might be quoting something she heard on the internet (the parts of it I’d expect her to actually be at even: christian forums), but she seems awfully matter-of-fact about it. Even taking into account how calmly she’s taken everything non-boy-related she’s encountered so far; nothing gets a Christian’s back up like dissing their theological habits.
Regardless: waiting curiously for further installments.
Wasn’t it Machiavelli who said “It’s better to be feared or loved than to be ignored”?
/notserious
From personal experience, Joyce’s response makes strong sense to me. She’s spent a very large time of her life so far at church and with other religious people. So did I, and even within those seemingly limited (from the outside perspective) parameters, you get a lot of discussion about doctrine and creeds and whatnot. Because being Christian is very important to devout Christians, these sort of nitty gritty topics get debated constantly. Is it okay not to go to church? Are works good enough for salvation? Can people be unsaved? These were frequent topics, sometimes argued heatedly amongst people I hung around with or looked up to. And it was all within the same church, which ostensibly believed in the exact same thing.
And so Joyce’s response in this comic doesn’t seem off to me. She’s trying to get a feel for what angle Billie’s coming from. Her only mistake is believing Billie cares as much as she does.
Sure, I can certainly see her being aware of the opposing position; it’s the way that she proactively offers the description of her own approach as “mindless”, apparently without sarcasm, that surprises me. At her politest I’d have expected her to paint both positions in a good light, not to blithely attack herself in her effort to portray the other position.
Of course, I *am* overthinking this; Joyce’s innocent naivete and admirable tendency to be accepting of other people’s worldviews (once the shock wears off) justifies almost any comment. It just seemed weird to me, is all.
I think Joyce may be repeating a belief that someone else has shared with her, rather than attaching negativity to the activity of routinely attending church. Yes?
Exactly.
Our catholic schooling encouraged us to think about this approach, the idea being that you were supposed to test your faith, by asking questions. On the other hand, simply going through the motions of attending mass & saying the words, was akin to worshipping false idols.
Not really a good marketing angle, though…
Almost all of the questions that are asked can be easily answered by actually READING the Bible and not just being a once a week Christian. For example, when it comes to works, they will not get you into heaven. No amount of good works will get you into heaven. This is not an opinion, it is pretty much the main theme of the New Testament. Just read Ephesians 2:8.
I think the main problem with this debate is the attitude that life is all just one big get-into-heaven game.
If god gave me, you and every other human life just to put us all through some spiritual test (that relies on some very specific beliefs to win) then firstly, an awful lot of people in history didn’t get a chance to get the memo, and secondly wouldn’t it be easier just to attend church a couple of times, say whatever magic words make you ‘win’ and then pay someone to shoot you?
I’m pretty sure god gave me life so I could love, grow, be challenged, bring happiness to people, suffer, get to know god better, build things, destroy things, eat things, make more people and eventually die. Life’s awesome (and sometimes it sucks). Why would god have made it so if it didn’t matter?
I think I’ve seen Billie at the Church of St. Mattress by the Holy Bed Springs once or twice..
Theists love to make fun of fundies, but all they are is theists who believe in God in the sense one believes in anything else, rather than the empty compartmentalization that lets you believe in God while typing on a computer designed for a clockwork universe, and ignoring everything the ancients said about him that especially doesn’t make sense.
The correct grammar is “all they are are”. I only mention this because it sounds and looks wrong, and thus is awesome. (Plus, word repetition is awesome.)
Also, fundamentalists ignore just as much as anyone else; the main difference is that the worldview they choose to embrace is more dissonant with observable reality than others. And/or they are louder and/or more self-righteous about it. They are not adhering closer to the text, because the text(s) in question are too large and lack sufficient internal consistency to create a consistent worldview based off of them without ignoring and/or “interpreting” various large parts. This unavoidably forces all adherents to either craft their own religion based on personally selecting/interpreting/ignoring various parts of the text, or to accept somebody else’s interpretation (to the degree they understand that person or organization’s interpretation). And from where I’m standing way over here to the left, this results in there being little or no reason to grant any one interpretation credibility over another – aside from the degree to which their interpretation conflicts with interpretable reality, of course (but that’s a separate issue).
Fundamentalism is believing in the core teachings of a religion but disregarding what is no longer relevant and doing your best to turn a millenia-old book into something that works for modern day. In that sense I myself am fundamentalist. Am I a bigot? No, I’m a lesbian, why would I hate myself? Do I believe in gender inequality? No, I’m a woman and I wouldn’t short myself, and I’m a good person and wouldn’t short others.
The Bible is a book written by a lot of different people, and some of it isn’t relevant anymore, some of it never really was in the first place because it’s a recollection of old laws and not of the Lord’s true will, some of it is literally true, some of it is true but in a different sense – worldwide flood is impossible, but a person’s “world” back then wouldn’t have been far without modern transportation or technology – and most of it is bringing out a point through metaphors. So obviously it’s hard to decipher.
There’s a gay liberal fairly traditional Christian view on it. Am I bothered by atheists? Not at all! Well, there’s a really frickin annoying vocal minority, most of whom are very rude and mean to me, but we Christians have a savage vocal minority too and it’s a lot bigger, and they’re rude and mean to me too, so yeah, can’t judge you on that. XP All I’m saying is don’t look at the crazy people on the news, maybe even in your town, and think that’s all of us.
Discarding part of the religion to adapt it to the modern day is pretty much the opposite of fundamentalism. With fundamentalism you get back to the fundamentals – that is to say, you adhere to as much of the original form of the religion as you can. It’s a reaction to the average religion’s tendency to change and adapt over time.
This also explains it’s tendency to lag behind scientific discovery and actively go to war with it: science says that a first-century worldview is false; those who are trying to get back to the first-century worldview reject the science.
Could it be that Joyce is actually learning something about the faith of others?
My mom raised me Catholic growing up, but she always told me that one doesn’t need to go to church to feel close to God. For her, she always told my brother and I that God was in everything, thus he was always with us. I always liked that idea towards faith.
“Sure, I’m Christian. …Who the Hell isn’t?”
…Wow. As a Brit, I’ve honestly never heard anyone who thinks like this. Is that seriously what some people think?
(Camp none-of-the-above here as well, btw 🙂 – I have no religion, but don’t mind anyone else having it.)
Well… Yes. Sometimes. Take someone in my situation.. I live in an area called the Bible Belt, and for some reason the few times I go out of those circles I still meet Christians. Given my experience, it is safe for me to assume someone is a christian. Since Billie doesn’t seem to overly-analytic she might have simply never questioned that assumption.
Actually, yes. Most of the people I’ve met who are Christian, can’t seem to get their heads around the fact that there are plenty of people in this country who aren’t (Barring atheists, of course. But they don’t count because they’re obviously doing the devil’s work.).
I mean, of course Middle Easterners are Muslim, and people from India are Hindu. But Americans? They’re Christian, of course.
Its more common than you might think. People tend to generalize their own experience for others. As someone who was raised religious but remained mostly apathetic about the subject, the idea that someone might not actually believe in some kind of God never occurred to me, even though I knew that people like Buddhists existed.
My church has these awesome seats that are really cushony but flat with a back and they fit together so you could easily sleep on them quite comfortably.
My Mum’s church recently replaced all their pews with nice chairs. It’s a vast improvement.
Although it is possible to argue the existence of many valid interpretations of the Christian ‘God’, on the whole the crux of religious belief is ‘faith’. ‘Faith’ is, according to the Oxford Online Dictionary, ‘strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof’. This is obviously not a logically sound attitude, but it becomes logically sound when the spiritual conviction defies explanation – if I was to somehow become convinced of any theist concepts without obvious attempts at psychological manipulation or psychological impairment, then I would take the very fact of my conviction as justification for that conviction. My problem is when people take their beliefs and try to force them into a mould, thereby expanding and corrupting their personal principles with no justification whatsoever – this is essentially voluntary brainwashing. Of course, if the God that you believe in as a matter of personal conviction and not through the teachings of others would require you to regularly submit to regular testimonies by potentially misguided humans, based on outdated texts, which that God would have dictated himself to human scribes, then by all means go to whatever your chosen church is… but it seems to me that this must usually be the ‘mindless’ option, as Joyce describes it, in which the churchgoer risks perverting their religious beliefs by conforming to a mainstream view while the basis and nature of their belief is entirely independent of this view.
This is my attitude, and sounds quite like the one that Joyce speculates for Billie, but I don’t know why this is acceptable within the boundaries of ‘Christianity’ when it runs contrary to many of the things that organised religion stands for.
On an unrelated note, about half of my friends are atheist and the other half are Catholic. This has never really caused any tensions – but no-one ever talks about their religious beliefs among people of differing beliefs, except sometimes by accident.
Um, convictions don’t become more logical when they start defying logical explanation. Obviously. That doesn’t work for 911 truthers and it doesn’t work for christians – and it doesn’t work for atheists either, for that matter. If you want your beliefs to be logical, stick to what makes sense based on observable reality. If you want to believe in the illogical and/or unconfirmable, do so if you must, but don’t attempt to conflate the two, because it simply doesn’t work. (And you really shouldn’t try to set yourself above the ‘mindless’ churchgoers based on your presumed, incorrect, logical superiority. It doesn’t make you look good.)
As for Joyce, I get the impression that she thinks that there is one Christian God, and that it’s pretty much impossible to be too wrong in how you worship him, because (as a conscious entity that actually exists and interacts with people) he would correct wrongheaded people and rectify their erroneous beliefs and behavior. That is to say, I doubt she believes there’s any way at all to be both Christian and brainwashed. Most likely she believes that attending church is a good thing to do (because God says so) and that it’s impossible to get ‘perverted’ information there, but if you don’t go and are still Christian you’re still mostly on the right path. Your rather exclusionary and critical view of other people’s beliefs would probably be rather foreign to her, between and among Christians anyway.
I was sticking to what makes sense based on observable reality; I was just using a posteriori reasoning – deducing the cause by observing the effect. The manifestation of ‘spiritual convictions’ must have some cause, and in the absence of any other explanation a subconscious knowledge of the truth of those convictions is, to me, an acceptable deduction, if not one that can be proven. I am not saying that this logically ‘proves’ the existence of God – it is simply a logically sound basis for the belief in God, whereas any other reason for belief that I can think of is not logical in nature by any means. I think when I referred to convictions ‘defying logical explanation’ was referring to the fact that no known causes could produce the effect, rather than the fact that no cause could produce the effect. It was poorly phrased, but I thought my meaning became clear through the argument.
The nature of this basis, however, leads to an individual approach to religion – one which is based on one’s personal convictions, and not on ‘education’ by others. A good church may help individuals to explore their own convictions, but in my experience it is also likely to force one’s beliefs into a particular shape – and if the God perceived before subjecting the psyche to religious teachings is real, then to potentially alter one’s understanding of Him according to the religious teachings of others who have no guarantee to understand Him equally well is a tremendous risk.
I agree that it’s exclusionary and critical.
Any point of view that one believes to be right is necessarily exclusionary – because one is either right or wrong. Maybe occasionally a mixture of the two, but usually polarised.
As for the critical aspect, it could be a lot worse. Many atheists take the lack of logical foundation for religious belief and conclude ‘All religious people are stupid.’ I take the same problem and conclude ‘Most religious people would do better to take a more individual approach to their beliefs’.
So your argument is, basically, 1) “In the absence of any other explanation, my religious experience most probably came from a divine source”, and 2) “No other approach for deducing the existence of a god is sound.”
Regarding statement 1, the tricky part is finding a religious experience that cannot be otherwise explained, particularly when you introduce an Occam’s Razor-style approach to weighing the credibility of solutions. God theories tend to be incredible, in both senses of the word, so virtually any other explanation comes off as more likely from a reasonably objective assessment. Up to and including the subject of the experience being a full-fledged lunatic – though in practical terms it’s quite rare that one needs to go that far to explain anything, since the sane human mind is a wild and wonderful place full of both great imaginative capacity and also a host of biases and filters and logical failings that likely proved quite useful when we were trying to avoid the saber-toothed tigers, but sometimes lead to erroneous conclusions. Humans see patterns everywhere, after all.
I feel obliged to mention that given a sufficiently unimpeachable proof, I myself would immediately convert – to belief in the entity’s existence, anyway. Most likely anything like that would require massively redundant video evidence, but it’s certainly theoretically possible. (Dying and awakening to see…nearly anything…would work too.) My response would not be a Christians, but real proof would sway me. Anything that might be in my head alone wouldn’t.
Regarding point 2…I agree! There are no good arguments for gods. However there are at least a few that are as good as your argument, arguably including “my mommy told me so and she wouldn’t lie.” Who are you to call their mom a liar, eh? Also there are some complex logical arguments, that can take a heck of a lot of work to sort out the errors therein even if you know what you’re doing. (Admittedly none of those point to a specific god, but let’s not quibble over details.)
As for the exclusionary-ness, religions and sects vary widely as to what they include; there’s nothing about having a position that necessitates that all other positions be false, especially when they are as co-similar as the various Christian beliefs. (Heck, they share a label!) Your take on Christianity seems atypically exclusionary to me for a Christian, since it seems to basically be “Everyone other than me is wrong”. (None of them share your experiences and exact beliefs, after all.) That’s pretty impressive by exclusionary standards, really – it puts mere rejection of the Catholics to shame.
A lot of atheists do consider all religious people to be stupid; I did too for a while, a while ago. I think it’s sort of a phase that atheists go through. It’s not correct, despite there seeming to be compelling evidence for it, and it certainly isn’t a productive theory. Nowadays I’m a firm believer in compartmentalism: smart people can certainly be mistaken, and if one holds tight to a mistaken belief long enough their mind starts to take steps to protect the belief. They can and do literally turn off their logic when it comes to the subject, if necessary; I’ve seen it happen. It’s pretty amazing (and a little scary) in persons who are otherwise overtly very intelligent, who discard all reason when you challenge something they hold dear. (My dad’s old college roommate was Steve Jones, the 911 truther. A college professor. Until he destroyed his reputation and career, anyway…)
I wouldn’t say that all athiests (And, if agnostics count, agnostics.) believe or have ever believed religious people are stupid.
See, here’s my thoughts on why people believe the things they do. People do so because they *want to,* because that’s what they’re comforable with, and frequenty that happens to be the beliefs they were raised with. I think that applies to both the religious and the irreligious.
Obvious example: The idea of God, of an all-knowing benevolent being who makes sure that ultimately, life *is* fair is an appealing idea. Death is a scary thing. Loss is a scary thing. Heck, even life can be a scary thing. So yeah, I can understand why someone is willing to believe in something like that without evidence. And if it makes them happy then I can’t say it’s in any way stupid.
But don’t get the wrong impression. I think the same can be said of athiests: I think that athiests don’t believe in got because they would be uncomfortable believing in god. There are a number of possible reasons for this, that appeal both to rationality and emotion. Some people, like myself, just can’t have faith in something if they can’t find any evidence to support its existence. I mean, seriously, I can’t. It would fly in the face of some of the principles that I have based my life around. On the emotional side, there is a positive side to existentialism. “Hey, humans can give their own purpose to life.”
I’m not saying those specific examples are indicative of the majority of the religious are the irrelgious, but I stand by my idea that ultimately people just believe what they want, and thus no belief has any sort of moral superiority over any other.
ah, religion. my dad is atheist, but my mum is christain (and the daughter of a vicar to boot). so which do i beleive in?
why, i took a third option and worship discordanism of course!
pope cards for everyone! unless your greyface.
“God exists, but it doesn’t matter.”
Deism FTW.
so much about Joyce is exactly like my mom. the hair style and color, as well as being deeply christian yet open minded. she’s even said some of the same things as Joyce here.
Joyce strikes me as more open-hearted than open-minded, but I do see what you mean. (Without actually knowing anything about your mom, of course.)
Church, smurch. Bokonon rightly tells us that all churches are granfalloons, dispensing pure foma. And as Bokonon says:
“If you wish to study a granfalloon,
Just remove the skin of a toy balloon.”
Worship is properly carried out by two people pressing the soles of their feet together. And for further reading, I refer you to the fourteenth Book of Bokonon, Chapter One.
did you really just say that
I never meet anyone else who’s read that book
and I don’t mean the Book of Bokonon
Really? I know a lot of people that have read it.
We will touch our feet, yes,
Yes, for all we’re worth,
And we will love each other, yes,
Yes, like we love our Mother Earth.
And my personal favorite of Bokonon’s Calypsos:
Tiger got to hunt,
Bird got to fly;
Man got to sit and wonder, “Why, why, why?”
Tiger got to sleep,
Bird got to land;
Man got to tell himself he understand.
Understand, indeed. “No fucking cat, and no fucking cradle.”
What an interesting kind of sitting-up mud I just met.
I’m a Christian, but I have animist/theist tendencies; I tend to treat mass as a guided meditation. It’s something that I do regularly for my own spiritual health, but I don’t consider the day and time to have any real significance. I’m just used to being up early on Sunday mornings, so it’s usually convenient to me (and I can grab lunch and groceries on the way home).
It’s like shaving; I can certainly skip a day if I have reason to (like if some idiot production coordinator schedules two 16-hour shoot days with no turnaround), but I end up looking and feeling like a mess.
Of course, I also accept that the Church-as-organization is essentially a political entity, with all the inherent flaws that that suggest. It may have been founded with the best of intentions, but, in order to carry out spiritual work, it needs to amass worldly power (you can’t help the poor unless you have power, and you have no power without money), and power/authority/wealth inevitably attracts the corruptable.
I also try form my own understanding of God whenever possible; even if it flies in the face of traditional Church doctrine (when Jesus says one thing [“Love thy neighbours”] and the Pope says something else [“Teh Gays are destroying the Family!!!”], I tend to follow Jesus).
(The guy hung out with tax collectors, lepers, deserters, foreigners, slaves, and prostiutes. If Jesus was here, he’d probably be performing gay weddings.)
I like your attitude. Of course, I also like the fact that I’m participating in a discussion about religion on the internet, with people of varying beliefs, and no one has flamed anyone yet.
Like your attitude, it’s refreshing.
I’m interested to see where this goes. Especially if Dorothy makes good on her “I’ll do anything to make it up to you” comment from the other day and attends church. I’m curious to see what kind of atheist she is. I would hope, given her attitude about everything else, that she’s given it serious thought and concluded in her disbelief for strong philosophical reasons, but I’m kinda used to being disappointed in fictional atheists.
I have a feeling you won’t be disappointed. If there’s any fictional atheist I’d count on to have a considered basis for her beliefs, it’s Dorothy.
I would be astonished if she went back on her word, too; she’s going to that church. (Once.) Though I would also be unsurprised if she kept her trap shut the entire time she was there; this is the sane way to avoid pointless conflict (unless you’re entertained by conflict), but it might interfere with you learning much about her reasons for pursuing the path she does.
There are a lot of fictional atheists that disappoint me, but I suspect Dorothy will not be one of them.
Dorothy will not be Mister Terrific.
Oh Billie so practical, so slothful. I love you
I actually like Billy’s reasoning as far as Church goes. I, too, and a Christian that believes. I also don’t think that attending Church does anything special really, as long as you believe. I also drink, curse, and had per-marital hanky panky, but does that make me a horrible sinner, I don’t think it does.
Plus, a lot of people at my Church are stuck up and look down on people if they aren’t completely “God is Law!” so I tend to work on Sundays. I have my belief, I don’t need someone in a suit to tell me how I should believe in that belief 🙂
wait, so, just to be clear, amber is amazi-girl, right? i’m new to the comic 😀
Amazi-girl is obviously Walky.
Close. Remember, Billie figured out that Sal is Amazi-Girl.
“I believe in God and everything, who the hell doesn’t, really?”
I don’t know, Billie. Most people? Oh wait, I remebered this was the USA.
I keep forgetting about these little cultural differences.
“Most people” actually do believe in a God of some sort. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religious_populations
I’m sorry but… “who doesn’t?” HONESTLY? What, are you from the bible belt?
…yes?
We should of known! Oh wait you told us…
*Should have.
If I recall, “Sundays are for sleeping” is the fourth of the Ten Commandments… more or less