|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5 [Next] | ||||||||||
Brian Turntime Special user 671 Posts |
Chessman, my friend...
BB code: add a " / " before the word quote within the brackets, to close the command and create the quote... Forgive me if it appears as you intended, in which case ignore what I said. [quote] opens the command, but must have this / to close it.
------
Last night I stayed up late playing poker with Tarot cards. I got a full house and four people died. - Steven Wright |
|||||||||
truthteller Inner circle 2584 Posts |
The question was, why are these products named the way they are? The answer is, because of the chuch's worldview, anything associated with unnatural acts was associated with the devil. So, yes, it was the church's world view (which was also the leading political worldview) which caused this situation people here find troubling.
It was Mr. Tripp who suggested that devil hanks are offensive and that we should vote with our wallet. I think this is a ridiculous notion (that devil hanks by name are offensive to sentient adults) and find it worth commenting on. As for the history of religious persecution and how it relates to magic, I think I'm pretty well up on my facts. Brad |
|||||||||
revlovejoy Special user Pennsylvania 765 Posts |
We on the Gospel magic board may know that Biblical accounts of angels are far form "wimpy" - (the words "do not be afraid" are often used), but the common popular image is the pair of cherubs on the postage stamp, or a light harp player.
My first sermon in my internship congregation was on the day of St Michael and all Angels. I did a bit of a history lesson on the intensity of angels in the scriptures, and how artistic changes got us to see them differently, but we ought to consider the power and impact of the Biblical ones. I ruined many a porcelain collector's day. |
|||||||||
Chessmann Inner circle 4242 Posts |
Truthteller wrote:
"The question was, why are these products named the way they are? The answer is, because of the chuch's worldview, anything associated with unnatural acts was associated with the devil." No, they are named that way because their creator's chose to name them that way. The devil of the christian worldview has no monopoly on being associated with unnatural acts. The christian God is associated with unnatural acts. Why then do we not see more tricks named after angels, etc...? Because their creators chose to make that association. I know what you are saying, however I believe it is too broad. "So, yes, it was the church's world view (which was also the leading political worldview) which caused this situation people here find troubling." Again, your knowledge of history here is not correct. The christian worldview has never come close to being the leading political worldview "It was Mr. Tripp who suggested that devil hanks are offensive and that we should vote with our wallet. I think this is a ridiculous notion (that devil hanks by name are offensive to sentient adults) and find it worth commenting on." Personally (as a fundamentalist Christian), I could care less what they are called. It signifies the type of effect/storyline that is possible with it, based on the creator's idea of it's application. I find the issue worth discussing, too. "As for the history of religious persecution and how it relates to magic, I think I'm pretty well up on my facts." You know, issues like these are ones that make me really want to sit down over a cup of coffee and go deeply into it. But this is a bulletin board, and it is really too difficult to do something like that - it would probably be deleted anyway as off-topic!
My ex-cat was named "Muffin". "Vomit" would be a better name for her. AKA "The Evil Ball of Fur".
|
|||||||||
llsouder Regular user 114 Posts |
This is an interesting discussion... thanks for all the information. Some of the history and human nature discussion brought to this topic has really given me some food for thought. The devil and dark association is exactly why many Christians shun magic.
I thought aobut this a lot also because of Criss Angel and I posted this comment before but I must say it again... Why is it that Criss Angel was able to call everybody in magic cheesy, but he is the new and great magician. All he has done is put more emphasis on the dark and evil. He took some standard stage stuff and put a Marylin Manson type of spin on it. Now all I hear are rave reviews. No more cheese here! I gonna start scaring my audience too! Who cares if there parents come complaining after the kids birthday party or Sunday School!!! |
|||||||||
Chessmann Inner circle 4242 Posts |
Sigh.... ;^)
This 'issue' has come up on a number of threads here at the Café. The *vast* majority of Christians do not shun magic. Those who do have had the misfortune to be introduced to it in *only one context*. They were taught that it was bad/evil, and more than likely no one has (yet) talked the whole situation over with them. I wouldn't have the slightest interest in seeing a Marilyn Manson style magic show, but that is not shunning magic - it is having no interest in that kind of presentation. One can take *anything* and do it in an "angelic" or "devilish" style.
My ex-cat was named "Muffin". "Vomit" would be a better name for her. AKA "The Evil Ball of Fur".
|
|||||||||
Payne Inner circle Seattle 4571 Posts |
Quote:
On 2005-08-21 21:04, Chessmann wrote: Truthteller never said that the christian worldview was the leading political world view, he said it was the church. The church, as a political entity and world power is quite different than the christian faith as it is set down. If the church had been more christian in its behaviour the world would most likely be a much better place. Anyway since angels and devils are the same species wouldn't they look exactly the same? so just start refering to all those red faces on your props as angels and your problem is solved
"America's Foremost Satirical Magician" -- Jeff McBride.
|
|||||||||
Chessmann Inner circle 4242 Posts |
"Truthteller never said that the christian worldview was the leading political world view, he said it was the church."
I believe you are making a distinction that I don't think he was trying to make. If so, ok. Then we can say that neither the church nor the christian worldview was ever the leading political worldview. "The church, as a political entity and world power is quite different than the christian faith as it is set down. If the church had been more christian in its behaviour the world would most likely be a much better place." There have always been people who truly strive to follow Christ. They make up the church. There have also been those who call themselves christians, but live lives that in no way seek to follow Christ. They are not christians (though they may label themselves as such), nor are they part of the church. So I would not agree that the church is different from the Christian faith. But again, I know what you are talking about. We're getting so theological! ;^) "Anyway since angels and devils are the same species wouldn't they look exactly the same?" Now there is an interesting thought! Thanks, Payne.
My ex-cat was named "Muffin". "Vomit" would be a better name for her. AKA "The Evil Ball of Fur".
|
|||||||||
Brian Turntime Special user 671 Posts |
Mark, I'm guessing he's never read the Revelation of St John.
Or Darwin-- considering how differently dogs, cats, and people (the same species) look...
------
Last night I stayed up late playing poker with Tarot cards. I got a full house and four people died. - Steven Wright |
|||||||||
Chessmann Inner circle 4242 Posts |
I suspect Payne meant that a generic 'devil' and a generic 'angel' could possibly look enough alike that it wouldn't matter which had their face on the trick - you could call it an angel or a devil.
My ex-cat was named "Muffin". "Vomit" would be a better name for her. AKA "The Evil Ball of Fur".
|
|||||||||
Payne Inner circle Seattle 4571 Posts |
Quote:
On 2005-08-22 00:31, Brian Turntime wrote: Since angels do not reproduce the laws of natural selection would not apply to them. They and their species would look exactly the same today as they did when they were first created eons ago. Even if they did somehow reproduce, since they are supposedly perfect beings there would be no mutations to pass on to their progeny.
"America's Foremost Satirical Magician" -- Jeff McBride.
|
|||||||||
Euangelion Special user 688 Posts |
Of course, as we wax theological we are likely to have more conflict on this board.
The sociology and social history is what it was. And it is well-recorded that the church as a social structure and institution opposed all things that threatened that power in Europe during the Middle Ages. It sought to oppress that inside and outside of the church. The Reformation led to a long period of overt conflict backed by struggles for political power. For several hundred years before crusades and inquisitions aimed the power against other groups: Jews, Islamics, gypsies, atheists, scientists, etc.. Part of the process included demonizing, literally, the opposition. Today the same thing is done politically; see the treatment by Karl Rove of McCain, Cleland, Kerry, and Sheehan or of liberal strategists of George W. and Rove. Today's paradigms use less images of devils and demons and more social images of Hitler and Stalin but the outcome is the same. And no I don't want to discuss which side is right, that is not appropriate here. However, the goal is the same; make the other anathema. As regards the names for such things "devil's hanks" are just fine with me ("nothing can separate us from the love of God" - remember Romans) it is only a name that is never mentioned in my show and I know I am not in league with such things. Why would you use the name in a show? Givng it a name makes it more suspect. Just pull out the hank and use it. The focus should be on what happens not anything that might be interpreted as contributing to it. What I need to know is what to call it when I want to buy one. Changing names complicates that greatly.
Bill Esborn
"Lutefisk: the piece of cod that passes all understanding." |
|||||||||
truthteller Inner circle 2584 Posts |
Well said, Euangelion
|
|||||||||
Chessmann Inner circle 4242 Posts |
Quote:
What I need to know is what to call it when I want to buy one. Changing names complicates that greatly. That is a very good point. If you take something that has been 'historically' known by one name, and then have some people begin calling it something else, things will get muddy. Leaving a trick's name as it is means it will be much easier for everyone to be on the same page. Can you imagine what it would be like here at the Café if a number of tricks began to go by more than one name? I wonder what would be a good name for a Topic on the Café where names of tricks would be hashed out? :^)
My ex-cat was named "Muffin". "Vomit" would be a better name for her. AKA "The Evil Ball of Fur".
|
|||||||||
Payne Inner circle Seattle 4571 Posts |
Quote:
On 2005-08-22 18:02, Chessmann wrote: The Babel board
"America's Foremost Satirical Magician" -- Jeff McBride.
|
|||||||||
Chessmann Inner circle 4242 Posts |
Quote:
On 2005-08-22 18:22, Payne wrote: LOL!
My ex-cat was named "Muffin". "Vomit" would be a better name for her. AKA "The Evil Ball of Fur".
|
|||||||||
rossmacrae Inner circle Arlington, Virginia 2475 Posts |
Go to any "primitive" (for lack of a better word) area - someplace where the people can accurately be called "villagers" or "natives." Show them a simple coin vanish. See what they call it ... "witchcraft" - "devil's tricks" - "the man is a sorceror, let's put a stop to his deviltry!".
You didn't have to call it "devil's" anything ... it comes naturally. I have a colleague who only had to be warned once that it was time to leave the area IMMEDIATELY, and no more tricks please!. |
|||||||||
Leland Stone Inner circle 1204 Posts |
Hiya, Brian:
If you'll excuse an off-topic detour into Middle Earth: Quote:
On 2005-08-21 12:39, Brian Turntime wrote: It seems to me that Satan is represented by Sauron, demonic minions by the orcs, higher echelons of the Underworld by the Nazgul; Gandalf appears to be one of several types (depictions throughout the work) of Christ; Galadriel of Mary (compare: Tolkien's devout Catholicism); Frodo another type of Christ; and Gollum of Judas -- a betrayer, but catalystic to salvation. Tom Bombadil? Hm. A type of God the Father, but in a deistic way that doesn't quite fit. Leland |
|||||||||
Payne Inner circle Seattle 4571 Posts |
Quote:
On 2005-08-21 12:39, Brian Turntime wrote: You obviously don't frequent the same social events that I do.
"America's Foremost Satirical Magician" -- Jeff McBride.
|
|||||||||
Payne Inner circle Seattle 4571 Posts |
Quote:
On 2005-08-23 00:15, rossmacrae wrote: Yeah, I've had this happen to freinds of mine too when the did tricks for the locals in Alabama
"America's Foremost Satirical Magician" -- Jeff McBride.
|
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » The Good News! » » Devil this, devil that. Why? » » TOPIC IS LOCKED (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.04 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |