That's either incredibly hilarious, or you didn't get the joke. I can't tell which ...
atheists: do you still take the name in vain?
- Thread starter captcalhoun
- Start date
That's either incredibly hilarious, or you didn't get the joke. I can't tell which ...
A
Amaris
Guest
You sir win one internet. Your choice of delivery is either by a big truck or a through a series of tubes.
I suspect that he's one of the unconverted. This thread may help to enlighten.
Eeeeeww! Holy snot!
You don't expect me to read the whole three pages. can you tell me what page this reference to a turkish prison is on.
You can choice ShamelessMcBundy, what ever one is funnier.
You've given me a sad.
Why?
I spelled out your whole name this time, which I have to start copying and pasting I always think I spelled it wrong.
To me, saying "by the gods" makes you sound like a character in an Italian sword-and-sandal movie. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing.I go for the plural option. The urge to say "by god" or such is there, but I've successfully trained myself to morph it into "by the gods", etc. . . .
. . . Saying "the gods" makes it a general invocation of humanity's gods and the concept of deities and such, without affiliation or taking any particular deity in vain.
I like movies about gladiators!
. Well, I tend to talk in a rather stilted fashion anyway, so it doesn't sound that odd coming from me as it might from others
. I go for the plural option. The urge to say "by god" or such is there, but I've successfully trained myself to morph it into "by the gods", etc. To use the singular suggests the Christian/Islamic/Jewish deity, and that might:
a) suggest my affiliation with one of those religions, which being non-religious I naturally wish to avoid.
b) offend those who do believe in that god (note I'm not one of those "must walk on eggshells, mustn't be offensive!" types; I simply don't see the need to risk offense when it's no trouble to me to avoid it).
Saying "the gods" makes it a general invocation of humanity's gods and the concept of deitys and such, without affiliation or taking any particular deity in vain.
Jesus, that sounds like of a lot effort.
Actually, it wasn't. It sort of comes to me naturally in the plural now.
Why?
I spelled out your whole name this time, which I have to start copying and pasting I always think I spelled it wrong.
Because you won't sit through 3 pages of quotes from one of the funniest movies ever.
Go then and enjoy. Watch both.
I go for the plural option. The urge to say "by god" or such is there, but I've successfully trained myself to morph it into "by the gods", etc. To use the singular suggests the Christian/Islamic/Jewish deity, and that might:
a) suggest my affiliation with one of those religions, which being non-religious I naturally wish to avoid.
b) offend those who do believe in that god (note I'm not one of those "must walk on eggshells, mustn't be offensive!" types; I simply don't see the need to risk offense when it's no trouble to me to avoid it).
Saying "the gods" makes it a general invocation of humanity's gods and the concept of deitys and such, without affiliation or taking any particular deity in vain.
I'm offended that you're taking all my gods in vain! Won't anyone think of the Hindus?
Well, luckily for Hindus, "Shiva H. Vishnu" has never really caught on.
Please do not offer my god a peanut.
I go for the plural option. The urge to say "by god" or such is there, but I've successfully trained myself to morph it into "by the gods", etc. To use the singular suggests the Christian/Islamic/Jewish deity, and that might:
a) suggest my affiliation with one of those religions, which being non-religious I naturally wish to avoid.
b) offend those who do believe in that god (note I'm not one of those "must walk on eggshells, mustn't be offensive!" types; I simply don't see the need to risk offense when it's no trouble to me to avoid it).
Saying "the gods" makes it a general invocation of humanity's gods and the concept of deitys and such, without affiliation or taking any particular deity in vain.
I'm offended that you're taking all my gods in vain! Won't anyone think of the Hindus?
You're right; while it certainly avoids affiliation with the monotheistic faiths, it might accidentally suggest my affiliation with a specific pantheistic faith. Maybe I didn't quite think my logic through .Of course, it's meant to refer to the general concept of gods rather than any one pantheon. Anyone can be included if they want, mono- or pan-. It's actually amusing - it's meant to avoid taking any name in vain, but it could be interpreted as taking all of them.
I potentially take the name of Jehovah in vain, and the name of Allah in vain! The name of Brahma in vain and the name of Shiva in vain! I take the name of Thor in vain! The name of Quetzalcoatl in vain! Hopefully it's so non-specific none of them will feel picked on and I'll avoid the thunderbolts
Oh, I love instant Win.
Heh. It's unanimous. We have a new Atheist custom.
I do blaspheme quite a lot. I started doing it when I was still a Christian and I'm not going to stop now. 
However, I do try to make an effort not to say "Thank God" or anything that isn't basically using "God", "Jesus" or "Christ" as a profanity.
However, I do try to make an effort not to say "Thank God" or anything that isn't basically using "God", "Jesus" or "Christ" as a profanity.
Similar threads
