Castlevania Season 2 is out on Netflix.

I am a fan of the first season and of most of the game series, two episodes in and i am liking it greatly so far. Wondering if their are any other fans of this animated series out there.

Everything that happens to Dracula’s wife is just gut wrenching. Sad because even though this is a work of fiction I sit here with a gin in hand and ponder how many good people were burned at the stake in times past. How many people have died at the hands of zealots, saddens me really.

Many religions have shed their barbaric natures in present times and have been reformed some have not however.
Well that’s is that time for one last gin on to episode 3 then bed.

originally posted by: Athetos
I am a fan of the first season and of most of the game series, two episodes in and i am liking it greatly so far. Wondering if their are any other fans of this animated series out there.

Everything that happens to Dracula’s wife is just gut wrenching. Sad because even though this is a work of fiction I sit here with a gin in hand and ponder how many good people were burned at the stake in times past. How many people have died at the hands of zealots, saddens me really.

Many religions have shed their barbaric natures in present times and have been reformed some have not however.
Well that’s is that time for one last gin on to episode 3 then bed.

I wonder how many good people have died at the hands of those who purvey and consume alcoholic beverages and who accuse the pacifists of atrocities.

Sitting in my own home having a gin is being compared to the crusades some how? Pacifists? Just who exactly are these pascifists you speak of.

a reply to: chr0naut

so sounds like Castlevania is a Hollywood excuse for Christian-bashing, like the Vikings.

pass.

Not at all that opinion is just mine. To be fair I have a dislike of almost all the religions out there. wouldn’t participate in any myself.

It show cases a courpt and evil church as well as a brainwashed and scared population. Christans have been reformed in mordern times like I have stated.

It’s also a work of pure fiction like Vikings, it dosent carry any weight except for the one you assign yourself.

a reply to: ElGoobero

originally posted by: Athetos
Sitting in my own home having a gin is being compared to the crusades some how? Pacifists? Just who exactly are these pascifists you speak of.

a reply to: chr0naut

Rule 1: Love the lord your God above everything else.
Rule 2: Love others as you love yourself.
Rule No 6: Thou shall not kill.

In actual history, it is usually the Christians who are the ones that are (still being) martyred at the hands of non-Christian groups... but not in fictional works, where the anti-hero is an extremely popular literary construct.

Also, Christianity, in being a highly law abiding group, doesn't prosecute anyone for crimes they have not first been found guilty of. They just don't go around 'denouncing' everyone and even if they did, it would be meaningless.

There is the whole case of innocent until proven guilty, legal representation, establishment of guilt in a court of law with impartial jurors and that any punishments should fit the crime.

In Christianity of course, more than in secular law, there are also strong legal arguments for mercy and for the validity of repentance/rehabilitation.

However, the willingness to allocate blame on the basis of getting worked up by the storyline of a cartoon isn't particularly the moral high ground, is it?

Rules for thee not for me. I guess we are too different, i don’t seek a moral high ground nor do I need one.i follow a path of what I believe is good, not what I am told to be good.
You have a very nice fantasy based view of religion. About as real as castlevania.
Yes innocent till proven guilty that’s true and don’t I dispute it..
Sure I agree Christians have been historically killed for their beliefs but guess what so has every other god believing group, the Jews the muslims the Christian’s, all awash in the blood of each other.

Also kinda funny but I didn’t point any fingers in my opening post, named no group in particular, strange that you would single out your own religion for the blame game. I simply used the term zealot, sorry you identify that way.

For the record I believe you missed my point entirely about the reform of religions. I have no qualm with Christians in their current state, what I was referring to was the so called religion of peace. The fundimenatlist nations still practice barabaric acts not seem for 100s of years.


Good talk. Really I do enjoy it.
a reply to: chr0naut

originally posted by: Athetos
Rules for thee not for me. I guess we are too different, i don’t seek a moral high ground nor do I need one.i follow a path of what I believe is good, not what I am told to be good.
You have a very nice fantasy based view of religion. About as real as castlevania.
Yes innocent till proven guilty that’s true and don’t I dispute it..
Sure I agree Christians have been historically killed for their beliefs but guess what so has every other god believing group, the Jews the muslims the Christian’s, all awash in the blood of each other.

Also kinda funny but I didn’t point any fingers in my opening post, named no group in particular, strange that you would single out your own religion for the blame game. I simply used the term zealot, sorry you identify that way.

For the record I believe you missed my point entirely about the reform of religions. I have no qualm with Christians in their current state, what I was referring to was the so called religion of peace. The fundimenatlist nations still practice barabaric acts not seem for 100s of years.


Good talk. Really I do enjoy it.
a reply to: chr0naut

But the religions haven't reformed. They believe now exactly what they believed then and all the rules are exactly the same. They aren't flexible. If it is written in their ancient books, it stands for all time.

Also, Jews, Christians and Muslims have historically been rather accepting of each other. Read up about the Medina Compact. While they disbelieve in each other's faiths, their opposition was primarily intellectual rather than violent.

The fact that we can both agree to a standard of what we believe is 'good' is indicative that it is innate in most humans. We have it because we are human, it doesn't have to be taught to us or be explained. Think about what that implies. It implies that there is something to one or more of those religions and is something which is anathema to atheism.

Old and new testiment?
www.britannica.com...
en.m.wikipedia.org...

The rules change all the time.
rationalwiki.org...
Multiple versions of the King James Bible, multiple interpretations of the versions even.
The abrahamic religions believe the same thing but are governed by different rules.


a reply to: chr0naut

originally posted by: Athetos
Old and new testiment?
www.britannica.com...
en.m.wikipedia.org...

The called it the 're'-formation because it was returning to its roots. The church had acquired a lot of stuff that wasn't in its scriptures.

The rules change all the time.
rationalwiki.org...
Multiple versions of the King James Bible, multiple interpretations of the versions even.
The abrahamic religions believe the same thing but are governed by different rules.

a reply to: chr0naut

None of the suggested differences involve any of the commandments.

They are mostly very minor issues such as punctuation or spelling and don't change any actual meanings nor are the important concepts only mentioned once in the Bible. Where one passage might have something arising from a particular translational or interpretatonal issue, there are multiple places in the Bible that speak of the same topic.

Seems like the video game adaptation curse is finally broken! Or at least kind-of broken.