Ursus Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 I grow weary of historical/academic discussions on religion that become derailed with modern day religious fervor and the veracity of "sacred texts." A recent instigator was placed on moderated status. Some of the rest of you are not much better though, and feed into it. If you want to talk about how great and glorious a certain god and his people and his texts are - go somewhere else. This is not the site for it. In case anyone missed the point of the site, we are here to discuss Roman History and culture. I can't speak for all the mods, but the next person that annoys me in relation to the above gets placed on mod status. I don't care if you're a pleb, or an equestrian or a patrician. You have been warned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Augusta Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 May I just stand up and applaud Ursus for this post. Many of us are with you on this, Ursus. Well said! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nephele Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 *applause*! -- Nephele Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pertinax Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 Quite. Discussing how a Deity impinged upon the Roman world, or how a deity was commonly perceived within that milieu is acceptable .Extrapolating ideas and dogma into the modern era is a step too far.. I think it best to repeat a suggestion I made in the recent offending thread, if commenting on textual matters (ie: a "sacred" text, a commentary on such a text) it would be much better to give a specific reference to give cogency to any post you make .Just to post "opinions" regarding a text in some broad brush manner is lazy and gives no focus to any sort of useful historical debate. I think all mods will be watching threads for "dogma derailment" of this nature, with a sterner eye henceforward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rameses the Great Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 I don't know what to say, I guess you should take away the entire religions folder because I think many take it here seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pantagathus Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 I don't know what to say, I guess you should take away the entire religions folder because I think many take it here seriously. Nope, you and others just need to follow Ursus' advice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pertinax Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 Seriousness is not a problem, but we have to have a definitive relevance to Rome. The subjectivity of belief is to an individuals conscience , but an appropriateness to historical discussion is needed otherwise the Forum will be skewed to non-Roman items in the Hora Postillia . The HP is a useful and diverting area , but it is perhaps the tail rather than the dog. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursus Posted February 8, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 I don't know what to say, I guess you should take away the entire religions folder because I think many take it here seriously. I could place you on mod status and then you wouldn't be able to say anything. Don't temp me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honorius Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 Yay for Ursus! (quite pleased u locked that topic in the 'byzantine' forum) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rameses the Great Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 (edited) I could place you on mod status and then you wouldn't be able to say anything. Don't temp me. I don't think you got what I said. I meant that when people are affiliated with a religion (Christianity, Judaism, Paganism, etc) it is often hard to be impartial. Instead of taking it as a part of Roman culture and history, they take it more seriously going beyond the parameters of what you (and many here) want to see discussed. I did not mean it they way you interpreted it, and see no wrong in what I said. Edited February 8, 2007 by Rameses the Great Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursus Posted February 8, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 1) I know exactly what you mean 2) I stand by my warning. You fed into IamJoseph's zionism-uber-alles drivel and contributed to the problem of derailing the threads Arguing the internal validity of a religion is something best left to forums specifically designed for that purpose. Or there are real life religious institutions in which I am sure many sympathetic ears may be found. This is however a Romanophile history/culture/archaeology site. We have a different focus. If someone can't restrain themselves regarding religious subjects perhaps they should refrain from visiting those threads. Or find a new site altogether. I have not noted any Pagans "preaching the word" as it were. Sometimes an agnostic can become too militant with their anti-religious sentiments, but for the most part they are respectful and restrained. The religious fervor seems mainly confined to a handfull of zealous monotheists who simply have no restraint or manners. I thus say again: follow the rules or find yourself silenced. If you must debate religion outside the parameters we set, then stay off the Temple Forum - or be gone. I could place you on mod status and then you wouldn't be able to say anything. Don't temp me. I don't think you got what I said. I meant that when people are affiliated with a religion (Christianity, Judaism, Paganism, etc) it is often hard to be impartial. Instead of taking it as a part of Roman culture and history, they take it more seriously going beyond the parameters of what you (and many here) want to see discussed. I did not mean it they way you interpreted it, and see no wrong in what I said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rameses the Great Posted February 9, 2007 Report Share Posted February 9, 2007 I thus say again: follow the rules or find yourself silenced. If you must debate religion outside the parameters we set, then stay off the Temple Forum - or be gone. As I said to Pantagathus earlier I will no longer discuss religion in this forum. You will not see me in those topics and I mean it. I will be confined to Rome and the Forum Peregrini. I will obey the rules set, don't worry about that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.Clodius Posted February 9, 2007 Report Share Posted February 9, 2007 (edited) I grow weary of historical/academic discussions on religion that become derailed with modern day religious fervor and the veracity of "sacred texts." A recent instigator was placed on moderated status. Some of the rest of you are not much better though, and feed into it. If you want to talk about how great and glorious a certain god and his people and his texts are - go somewhere else. This is not the site for it. In case anyone missed the point of the site, we are here to discuss Roman History and culture. I can't speak for all the mods, but the next person that annoys me in relation to the above gets placed on mod status. I don't care if you're a pleb, or an equestrian or a patrician. You have been warned. So, if a person wished to claim himself the all powerful messiah and turn donkey piss into vodka, would they be banned? Edited February 9, 2007 by P.Clodius Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost_Warrior Posted February 9, 2007 Report Share Posted February 9, 2007 If they can turn donkey piss into vodka, they'd better be able to prove it. And if they can prove it, they're my new best friend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosmo Posted February 9, 2007 Report Share Posted February 9, 2007 Yay for Ursus! (quite pleased u locked that topic in the 'byzantine' forum) I fully agree that this is something that needed to be done, but I liked that thread before that person who did not know history and had a political/religious agenda hijecked it for propaganda. The discussion was ruined by him and now the thread is locked Largelly it has run his course, but it's not a good precedent. When the troll came I tried to mantain the original purpose of the thread, but got overrun by a flood of offtopic and non-sense stuff and gave up. Maybe, in the future when another one comes, you should clean the off topic stuff from a legitimate thread (like you usually do), but keep it open. Otherwise, you let them win. I had a feeling that he wanted desperately to hijack the thread because his agenda did not liked a discussion about christian/muslim cohabitation. He had nothing to say about the topic, but he wanted to stop us and he did Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.