User talk:T. Anthony/Archive 2

This is an archive. Please do not respond to or edit things here, thank you.--T. Anthony 09:15, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Comparitive Religions

Looks like you are very much interested in comparitive study of religions. Right? If yes, then let me know because I am interested too. Thanks! PassionInfinity 10:50, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm glad you're friendly. I got a sense on the List of people who have said that they are gods that we really didn't get along at all. Anyway yeah religions interest me. They last longer than almost anything in human society and they keep things longer too. The closest thing to ancient Egyptians is in the Coptic liturgy I believe. A form of Aramaic is still spoken by some Christian Middle Easterners. Ideally I think returning to that or Greek would've been better than abandoning a universal language for Catholicism. I don't have a positive view of Traditionalist Catholicism, but I think lacking a universal language has hurt Catholic music pretty bad. I think the music should ideally be in the same language everywhere. Traditionally I was pretty devout Catholic, but a near-fatal accident and reading some old encyclicals made me less certain. Although the Catholicism I was raised in, post-WWII Catholicism, I don't have any problems with and probably agree with more than most Catholics. In fact it's probably just the period from 1095-1895 that makes me uncertain.

I had a long-standing interest in other religions even from my most devout period. I have a copy of the Book of Mencius, Analects of Confucius, Tao Te Ching, Upanishads, a collection of Hadith, a Huston Smith deal, American Indian myth book, and I have an Avesta site generally close at hand. I also have CDs of Buddhist chants, Russian Orthodox Chant, Shaker music, a CD with several Ali Farke Toure songs of an Islamic bent, and even what turned out to be a Neo-Paganist type CD. Outside of my own faith I think I feel the most "connection" to Chinese philosophy and maybe Zoroastrianism. Well Eastern Orthodoxy too, but not the Russian kind. Greek Orthodox Church is probably the one that I feel most "connected" too, but I like the history the Armenians have. For whatever reason I feel almost no connection to any form of Protestantism. The Quakers, Mennonites, and Moravians might be an exception to that. I don't have any problems with Protestants themselves, I just don't find Protestant religions all that interesting or compelling. There's very few religions I feel uncomfortable toward to the point it might effect how I deal with their members. Probably just Scientology, Unification Church, Wahabbism, Juche, and Objectivism. I'm discounting small(under 10,000) extremist new religious movements in this "uncomfortable" slot. Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses make me somewhat uncomfortable, but at the same time I have a great respect for them. In those two cases it's a prejudice of youth I'd hope to shed, but it lingers to a small degree. Kind of weird admitting prejudices, but I think everyone has some religion that makes them uneasy. I don't see how it's possible to be comfortable with every religion out there.(Also as this is my talk page I can call Juche or Objectivism a religion)--T. Anthony 11:37, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

You said you are a christian. Right? Why not talk about semetic religions? Leave all other others. I am interested in these revealed religions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Rest all are actually human philosophies? Sorry, I was away and could not reply. PassionInfinity 06:06, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

They are a part of other cultures and it's useful to understand them when learning of those societies. I'm interested in history and geography too. Also in Catholicism we have the concept of natural law. It's interesting to study non-Semitic religions to understand what human reason can realize without revelation in order to better appreciate/understand the value of revealed religion. Or something like that, I just like learning of it. There's also a long history in Christianity of studying non-semitic religions in order to deal with them and understand your own faith. The Apology of Aristides compared Christianity to Egyptian, Chaldean, and Roman mythos in the second century. Several of the second century Church Fathers made similar studies.--T. Anthony 06:49, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

I would like you to talk about Islam and Christianity in particular. What do you think? I am not as such interested in non-Semitic religions. Please leave a short message on my talk page so I get a notification when you have responded! Thanks PassionInfinity 13:33, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't post much at other people's talk page. Although I get that the Semitic or Abrahamic religions are your interest so with you I'll limit myself to that.(On my own talk page I'll work with whatever interests me as is my right. No offense meant)--T. Anthony 14:06, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

What I wanted to say was that I don't get any notification that you have responded. That's why I said that just leave a short message. Nothing else! Yes, since you are a christian therefore I want you to restrict to Islam and Christianity.PassionInfinity 05:07, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Okay I'll restrict our conversations to that.--T. Anthony 05:23, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

OK! First give me some introduction how much do you know about Islam. You said you have taken some classes on Islam. Who delievered the lectures? How much was the depth of the lectures? Did you attend them for the sake of interest or in search of truth or simply for an enjoyment? PassionInfinity 09:47, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

It was because of my history interest. It was mostly by this professor who lived in Mali for a time. I've tried to learn a bit on my own for similar reasons. I never read the Qur'an though because I feel like it should be read in Arabic, but the only Arabic I know is a very small number of simple phrases. As for specifics I used to know the major Sufi orders and schools of Islamic law. I read a fair amount on ijtihad in the classes as it was important to them and kind of interested me, but I imagine my knowledge is ultimately weak. I studied a bit on the Rashidun, is that the right word, period and current teachers. The Medieval period I've read, very little, of Averroes and Ib Taymiyya. I've looked through some of the collection of Hadiths I have. Mostly what I've read about has been Sunni, but I read a bit on Ismailism. I imagine it's obvious this is intellectual curiosity. There is literally zero chance I'd become Muslim, but I respect Islam and I admire how much Islam did for scientific progress.--T. Anthony 10:06, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

How can you be so sure that you would never become muslim? I mean even if the truth reveals itself in front of you very clearly? One should always be in search of Truth as far as I am concerned! I argued a lot with an atheist some times ago but in vain. Although he himself was unable to prove the non-existence of God, but argument resulted in nothing. The case with a christian would be alot different, I hope. May be because we alreay agree a lot on lots of points. What do you think? PassionInfinity 10:20, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

I just find it highly unlikely. I'm having some doubts, but the spiritual experiences I've had would be almost impossible to justify in Islamic terms. In fact they would be hard to explain even in Protestant or Jewish terms. The religion of my ancestors for centuries is also Christian. I probably shouldn't have said it the way I did though. It just was a way to say that if you do hope conversation would lead me to convert to Islam, well then you should quit right now. I know I don't have to worry about you preaching like that though, so it was an unnecessary thing to say.

As for atheism they are often very certain they are right. I get along with some atheists, but there are those who insist any religious person is stupid. Wiki has some anti-religion biases. In most any other place an article like Religiousness and intelligence would be seen as trolling. It's occasionally disheartening as religion interests me. To the extent that I hope I didn't scare you off. Anything you want to tell me about Islam is cool.--T. Anthony 10:35, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Fine! I think you skipped some of the things that I asked. However, I will try to reveal the truth upon you. Ret all lies with you. Accept it or reject it. I may or may not be successful in what am I aiming at. However, I must tell you something. The argument that your ancestors were christians clearly reflects that you blindly believe in christianity and never went out in search of the ultimate truth. Further arguments right now will make you think I am rude whereas I am not! PassionInfinity 12:06, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure I like your tone. I'm willing to learn, but I don't want to be insulted. I just meant my faith is part of my tradition and what I've accepted. I do learn of other religions.--T. Anthony 12:32, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

May be because that there is some translation problem. I told you I am neither getting rude nor I am insulting you. Just want to show you some stunning fact about Islam. Don't mind if you disliked anything above! Sorry for that! PassionInfinity 12:40, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Oh good. It probably is just a language deal. Well I'm going to go have breakfast, read you later.--T. Anthony 12:44, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Looks like you are always browsing wikipedia without any rest. Secondly, I am also off for one day. I will read you when I will be back. PassionInfinity 13:00, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

I have a question. Which christian sect do you belong?

Roman Catholic.--T. Anthony 12:56, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Secondly, are you more inclined towards protestants?

No. I do not relate to protestantism at all. Although the more conservative Quakers and some things about the Moravian Church sound alright.--T. Anthony 12:56, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Thirdly, do you believe in Holy Trinity?

Yes I do.--T. Anthony 12:56, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

That would be our main topic. Actually, I am busy nowadays with my office work and usually don't get time to respond. Don't worry we will discuss this. I am not running away!

The main problem between our conversation would be language limitations.

Indeed, I have noticed this as a problem.--T. Anthony 12:56, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

I mean its not that I will not be able to make you understand what I want to say, but that it may seem rather rude to you. Be very sure, I will never be rude and that is for sure. If we disgree on something, it doesn't mean we should start insulting and disgracing each other. I think it is clear now? PassionInfinity 12:42, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

I am sorry if I took unfair offense. Sadly I know no other language well. If you have any difficulty understanding me I will try to help.--T. Anthony 12:56, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

That would be particularly useful. Thanks! PassionInfinity 05:53, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

About Comparitive Religion

This is in addition to the above title of Comparitive Religions. Sorry I was absent and usually inactive on wikipedia. Can you do me a favour? Please go through this completely and carefully. I would be thankful to you! PassionInfinity 12:54, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

It's interesting from what I've read. As it's essentially advocacy as a non-Muslim that colors my reading a bit. Still I'm glad he found something that worked better for him and it does help me understand that perspective better.

That said his difficulties with the Gospels from when he was Christian I think are generally weak. For example Jesus's conversations when he was alone being recorded is not unusual if one already believes the Gospels are the inspired word of God as Christians do. Even if one doesn't he had time to relate what happened before the later events of the Gospels. His telling them what just happened is not recorded as it would be redundant. It's not at all unusual though for ancient histories to record events unwitnessed except by a single individual. The oddness he finds in statements about "reading what he says" is ahistorical. Many great figures in history believe that their words we'll be read after they died. Added to that it goes along with Jesus as prophet/messiah and therefore knowing for certain that his words would be read by future generations. The statements about the end-times coming in the lifetime of his disciples are more difficult to explain. There are theories and I have some ideas of my own, but I admit it's an awkwardness.

Also the Q document is ultimately an effort like the efforts to understand Proto-Indo-European or Nostratic. Meaning it's a theory. If there was such a document it's been lost through history. What was in it, if it existed, can only be construed not known. As such I personally feel it makes more sense to go with the historical documents we actually have rather than one's created through hypothesis. Even then I'm uncertain how much Q really jibes with the Qur'an. Although again it is interesting to read and learn why people believe as they do. Also if this works for him or you that is nice. This is a shorter less in depth response than I want to give, but I hope to take off for the holidays if I can get over my addiction to this place:) Anyway I'm not planning on a full return until in least December 26. Salaam and thanks for the reading material.--T. Anthony 14:32, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

category for UFO cults or what we call them

Can we create a category called category:UFO faith movements or category:UFO based faith groups? That category would be a sub-category of the category NRMs. I think that a category "UFO cults" would be a more generally accepted name outside of Wikipedia, but not allowed here (because of the pejorative connotation of the word cult reasons). Andries 18:28, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Interesting, yeah I could see that. Although it's not like I'm in charge here, if you want to do it go for it.--T. Anthony 22:39, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Not exactly related to this, but I might set up one for New Thought.--T. Anthony 22:43, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Bryn Athyn

As you pointed out there are three articles on the same topic, I am doing the merges now, which article title do you think the finished thing should be placed under? I'll be finished in about 15 minutes maybe, I'll leave the move to you, since I am not familiar with the subject content, is that Ok? Jdcooper 14:15, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

I honestly am not sure. I think it should be either "Bryn Athyn Cathedral" or "Bryn Athyn cathedral", the third was too words, but I don't know if I have a preference. I guess the capital letter looks nicer.

And don't be fooled I'm not all that familiar with this either. I just like looking stuff up, I'd barely heard of this cathedral before going to Wiki. Although I did know of Swedenborgianism because I was surprised to read of an old non-Scientology religion founded on the writings of a guy listed in The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction. Also I'd heard of Swedenborg before I'd ever heard of this religion as I was interested in inventors and the history of science as a kid. It sounds a bit out there to me, but interesting as a religion based on the works of(basically) a scientist.--T. Anthony 14:31, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Lumpa Church

I'm a theology student in Utrecht, The Netherlands. Yesterday I had an exam about the world history of Christianity. In the exam your Lumpa Church article has been quoted with a question about the resemblance and difference with other African Independent Churches. Greetings, Jcbos 17:16, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Umm Wow. I'm flattered. Although I do feel I should point out that most everything in it isn't really "mine."(Wikipedia rule against original research and all) There are some good, or in least adequate, sites on African Independent Churches that the article links to. Essentially the article is just paraphrased from a mixture of those. Hence Norbert C. Brockman, J.-L. Calmettes, David Gordon, and Wim van Binsbergen really deserve most of the credit. At most I just got their work available to a new audience.

It's nice to know though that articles like that are even being read. I see my name on them as the only one, with no talk page, and I start wondering if I'm only writing things like that to educate myself alone. I tend to like the odd or out of the way stories everyone misses. Anyway thanks again.--T. Anthony 02:31, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

List of Quakers--Olaf Stapledon

Can you cite a source on Olaf Stapledon? I would like to make sure that the List of Quakers is accurate, but I don't have firsthand knowledge of the matter. If you feel comfortable doing it, could you remove him from the list? 06:32, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

That he was not a Quaker?(Because that was my position) My main source is probably Robert Crossley. To be more specific his book Olaf Stapledon: speaking for the future Syracuse University Press ISBN: 0815602812. He mentions that Stapledon joined with a Christian Socialist party called Commonweal but states this was unusual as he wasn't Christian. He worked on a Friends Ambulance Service in World War I and, during it, he did attend a few meetings I think. However he was never identified by himself or others as Quaker. Star Maker in particular is hard to square with any Christianity, even Quakerism.(I take it many Quakers these days are like Unitarians and not necessarily Christian, but I don't think this was true in his era)--T. Anthony 06:47, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Just in case

In holding pattern depending on the fate of the List of Church of Christ Scientists--T. Anthony 02:42, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

List of agnostics

Hey T, if you are going to edit the List of Agnostics Afd, removing all my brilliant commentary, can you at least strike out one of your many votes. -- JJay 05:45, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Sorry it was getting a length warning. If you want to put that stuff back you can.--T. Anthony 05:46, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

It survived! Yay! I apologize again profusely for my bad faith effort. I'm pretty sure I've only done two possibly three bad faith delete votes, but that is three too many. (Although again List of virgins was not entirely bad faith)--T. Anthony 03:00, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Catholic list death toll/Demographics

From what I can tell eight of the lists of Catholics lost on deletion vote. Adding things like lists of Cardinals and popes I think there was 21 Catholic people lists. So this is a cutback of about 38%. Although two of the ones that were never up for deletion involved those excommunicated or who identify as ex-Catholics. So of ones, in least in principle, concerning practicing Catholics the reduction has been a little over 42%. Some of these lists had become unmanageable or did not relate well to the topics. In other cases I suspect demographic factors. If that makes me sound paranoid to some, I can live with that.

On demographics I think Wikipedia is probably the worst skewed on age. I was looking through the categories of Wikipedians and few to no one self-identifies as older then 50. This might be expected of the Internet, and also misleading as older people may just choose not to categorize themselves as such, but I think there might be some skewing on that. I'm not sure if ageism is that big of a problem at Wikipedia, but for next weekend I'm going to try to do more on topics that I've seen appeal to older generations or old people issues. (I am a 28 year old man, but I'm kind of like an old man at heart. Someone told me that as an insult, but I was quite happy with it. I have a Glenn Miller CD, own a Fedora (hat), have Vertigo on DVD, etc)--T. Anthony 07:54, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

I'd appreciate your thoughts on

this straw poll about Andy Rooney's entry in List of agnostics Dpbsmith (talk) 20:26, 28 November 2005 (UTC)