THE QUESTION (first date)
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-11-2013, 03:20 PM
RE: THE QUESTION (first date)
I haven't had a first date since becoming an atheist, but humor usually works for other issues I don't want to get into. So I might try something like this

"No...I'm one of those guys your mom warned you about. You should probably run away from me right now." Wink

"I feel as though the camera is almost a kind of voyeur in Mr. Beans life, and you just watch this bizarre man going about his life in the way that he wants to."

-Rowan Atkinson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Can_of_Beans's post
17-11-2013, 03:20 PM
RE: THE QUESTION (first date)
(17-11-2013 03:13 PM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  I just don't feel I really have too much of a choice. It's not super hyper religious where I live, and certainly there surly are other atheist, and really I don't need them to claim atheism, just as long as they don't really care about religion. But those types are few enough and far enough between that holding to that as a standard means removing a massive dating pool.

Plus, in the same way that I would not want someone to judge me in a relationship or dating situation because I'm an atheist, I wouldn't what to do that to them either. I have a more laissez faire approach to it at the start, and just see where it goes.

Fair enough.

But I don't see it as judging when you don't date someone based on religious belief. I don't think any less of them. I just know that a core value is very different, and most of the time its a difference that's a problem. I get that it works for some people. It just never has for me. (Im pretty...err...pushy) lol
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-11-2013, 03:37 PM
RE: THE QUESTION (first date)
(17-11-2013 03:20 PM)Hobbitgirl Wrote:  
(17-11-2013 03:13 PM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  I just don't feel I really have too much of a choice. It's not super hyper religious where I live, and certainly there surly are other atheist, and really I don't need them to claim atheism, just as long as they don't really care about religion. But those types are few enough and far enough between that holding to that as a standard means removing a massive dating pool.

Plus, in the same way that I would not want someone to judge me in a relationship or dating situation because I'm an atheist, I wouldn't what to do that to them either. I have a more laissez faire approach to it at the start, and just see where it goes.

Fair enough.

But I don't see it as judging when you don't date someone based on religious belief. I don't think any less of them. I just know that a core value is very different, and most of the time its a difference that's a problem. I get that it works for some people. It just never has for me. (Im pretty...err...pushy) lol

I do actually agree with you, I don't think its judgmental at all. Just an observation of reality based on passed relevant experiences. I'm just a little more of a, "lets see what happens here" kind of guy.

I literally went to a religious college, despite being a life long atheist and having no affiliation with the religion of the college at all, just because I figured, hmmm, this should be interesting and different, (and because of the scholarship, that was the biggest motivating factor).

...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-11-2013, 03:40 PM
RE: THE QUESTION (first date)
(17-11-2013 03:37 PM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  
(17-11-2013 03:20 PM)Hobbitgirl Wrote:  Fair enough.

But I don't see it as judging when you don't date someone based on religious belief. I don't think any less of them. I just know that a core value is very different, and most of the time its a difference that's a problem. I get that it works for some people. It just never has for me. (Im pretty...err...pushy) lol

I do actually agree with you, I don't think its judgmental at all. Just an observation of reality based on passed relevant experiences. I'm just a little more of a, "lets see what happens here" kind of guy.

I literally went to a religious college, despite being a life long atheist and having no affiliation with the religion of the college at all, just because I figured, hmmm, this should be interesting and different, (and because of the scholarship, that was the biggest motivating factor).

An atheist at a religious school? Amusing. I'd love to see that. Consider
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-11-2013, 03:50 PM
RE: THE QUESTION (first date)
Holy shit I totally lucked out with my wife. I can't imagine trying to find someone to date around here that would be okay with an atheist. Lots of luck to ya.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-11-2013, 04:49 PM (This post was last modified: 18-11-2013 09:50 AM by Raptor Jesus.)
RE: THE QUESTION (first date)
(17-11-2013 03:40 PM)Hobbitgirl Wrote:  An atheist at a religious school? Amusing. I'd love to see that. Consider
[Edit: I was in a hurry when I wrote this, and did not have time to proof read it and clean it up. So it does have some sloppy writing in there, but as it's a day later, I'm just leaving it as it is]

I was an Anthropology major, and I'm pretty sure all my Anthropology professors were atheist themselves, most I know for sure were, so that didn't really effect that. Religion never really came up, even though we had a chapel right in the center of campus. My roommate was a Mormon, who decided the just drink, party, have sex with any girl who would let him, and then do some two year atonement afterwords for his church so that he could still get married in the Mormon temple one day. He found a loophole that "God" didn't notice, and doesn't mind him using...

The only requirement was that we take a religious studies course once per year. I took the Eastern religion courses when I could, and I'm pretty sure my professor of Eastern religions leaned more toward those religions than his own. He loved eastern religions. We even had "field trips" to Buddhist temples, and a Taoist shrine, and things like that.

But I did have one class, that was only on the Gospel of Mark. The professor was great. He was "brother", he wore the full black robe with white rope belt thing they tie around their waste and everything. He looked like a monk. He was actually pretty awesome and way knowledgeable. He taught the Gospel of Mark from a historical, literary, and Anthropological perspective of the time. He was not one of my Anthropology professors thought, but he did a great job on the Cultural Anthropology of the people of that time.

He taught that class through the lens of the real world. He never spoke of any of the miracles being real. Taught that the Gospels where written between 70-130 AD, and explained how we know that. Taught that there was an escalation of miracles from the first Gospel to the last, and explained it as an attempt for the Gospel writers to convince later generations that Jesus was divine in order to save the Jesus movement cult as the narrative of the fictional life of Jesus evolved over generations. He taught that Jesus was not really born of a virgin and explained why that depiction was not present in the first Gospel, but was slowly added in later Gospels when the writers were more desperate to convince them to follow a leader who is now long dead and essentially failed at what he was trying to do and trying to convince them that his death was now meant something different in order to keep followers, which is why they had to turn more an more to the divine and an escalation of divinity claims, until by the end he is virtually "God" himself, but not quite, thought the first Gospel did not make this claim, and how some later edits were made by future scribes. He explained the real meaning of the exorcism of demons, that they weren't to be taken literally as exorcisms, at least not by the writer of the first Gospel.

One of which for example, the exorcism of the pigs, whose demons' names was "legion for they were many", same as the Roman legionnaires of which there were many soldiers in Jerusalem, were cast out into pigs, an insult to Romans as pigs are unclean, and driven off into the ocean, representing casting the Romans back across the sea to return to their land and leave, also implying by death if necessary as the pigs drowned. He explained it all in a way in which we didn't need to believe that Jesus really did any of these things, and that the earliest writer of Mark at least never intended people to think that it was true. They were stories for the people of the time to understand in the context of the events happening in their lives, at the time, not to be taken literally. They were coded messages that the Jews would understand, as rebellion against the Roman occupation of there land, "God's" land, or "God's Kingdom", otherwise known as Jerusalem, not Heaven. That nearly the entire New Testament, with the exception of some stuff with Paul and some other odds and ends, was mostly completely about Roman occupation in Jerusalem and reclaiming the Jewish sovereignty over the land of Jerusalem, reestablishing the Jewish kingdom in the New Jerusulom once they regain control , and that that new Jewish Kingdom is in fact the Kingdom of God on earth, and Jesus was attempting to bring about that change to kick out the Romans, and establish "Gods" Jewish Kingdom on earth. None of it was to be taken in the literal way we take it today, but for the people at the time to be called to action against Rome. It was meant to be a movement, not a religion, and when that failed the followers then augmented it into a different kind of religion based around Jesus.

And a 'Brother' at a religious college taught this to me. I have no idea how he could know all this and still 'believe'. But that single class changed the way I looked at the bible, and I reread the whole thing multiple times with that in mind. I actually think it ways a very good experience. Didn't make me less atheist, if anything it just made the bible start to make more sense as far as a document and what it was really meant for, and how it as evolved into what we see today.

That's a really long way to also point out reasons why I don't dismiss religious people. Some can surprise you.

...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Raptor Jesus's post
17-11-2013, 04:51 PM
RE: THE QUESTION (first date)
Evenheathen, can I ask you wants up with your Avatar photo? Every time I see it it looks like a baby chimpanzee skull.

...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Raptor Jesus's post
17-11-2013, 05:23 PM
RE: THE QUESTION (first date)
(17-11-2013 04:51 PM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  Evenheathen, can I ask you wants up with your Avatar photo? Every time I see it it looks like a baby chimpanzee skull.

No idea where it came from to tell you the truth. We use it as a logo for our band t-shirts, just because it looks fucked up. I think someone mentioned that it was the skull from some deformed baby from China a long time ago, but don't quote me on that. Freaky looking though isn't it? Confused

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-11-2013, 05:27 PM
RE: THE QUESTION (first date)
(17-11-2013 05:23 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  
(17-11-2013 04:51 PM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  Evenheathen, can I ask you wants up with your Avatar photo? Every time I see it it looks like a baby chimpanzee skull.

No idea where it came from to tell you the truth. We use it as a logo for our band t-shirts, just because it looks fucked up. I think someone mentioned that it was the skull from some deformed baby from China a long time ago, but don't quote me on that. Freaky looking though isn't it? Confused

Oh yeah! A conjoined twin skull! that's what that is!

...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-11-2013, 05:31 PM
RE: THE QUESTION (first date)
(17-11-2013 05:27 PM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  
(17-11-2013 05:23 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  No idea where it came from to tell you the truth. We use it as a logo for our band t-shirts, just because it looks fucked up. I think someone mentioned that it was the skull from some deformed baby from China a long time ago, but don't quote me on that. Freaky looking though isn't it? Confused

Oh yeah! A conjoined twin skull! that's what that is!

Hehe. Fucking metal.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: