Christianity

[Distruzio]

Although some fellows in my faith are bitter, I generally take the tolerant view. I heavily disagree with it's theology and methods; and I really dislike many saints in the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Anglican churches.

Tea, out of curiosity, where do you go to worship?

[Oterro]

Agreed, didn't Marx say that? I just read Christopher Hitchens book "God is Not Great" and he gives some convincing arguments, I was brought up as a Catholic and went to an English Catholic School in which there has been a huge paedophillia scandal, luckily I was never victimised. But I know some who were, and it's pretty much put me off religion for good. What would that Gallilean preacher thing now if he saw the extravagance, the pomposity and the pathetic half-apologies of the Roman Catholic Church today, and overall in my opinion Christianity has done far more harm than good. But as Freud said, religion will exist as long as humanity fears death.

I promise you that fear of death has NEVER been a contributing factor to my faith. Moreover, when I read hitchens I was put off by his extreme arrogance and how easily I could identify myself with his observations... meaning that I was a shitty person and that hitchens is wrong.

Christopher Hitchens was a real asshole.

On topic I was raised by a protestant and catholic family but they never forced it on me. I wasn't christened as they wanted me to be able to choose my faith and when I was younger I was a Christian. I do not subscribe to any religion anymore, however. Generally I grade my religions by their impact culturally and artistically, really. So I rank Christianity high in that regard.

[Distruzio]

Bluth Corporation, I just don't get it. What is "Christness", and how have you arrived at the conclusion that Christianity precludes the existence of a deity?

You suggest there's a reason that I was taught what I was taught. Are you suggesting that the modern conception of Christianity, in all its forms, is the product of some sort of distortion? That you're following a "dead school" as it were, one which teaches something that everyone else wanted to hide or destroy? Where can I get more information on the dead school? Is it some kind of Atheistic form of Gnosticism?

Its his own version of Gnosticism, although he may not identify it as such. I've never come across a Gnostic school that shares more than casual similarities withba few of his perspectives. That being said, were he to describe himself as Gnostic, his variation would be one of the few that I didn't find utterly repulsive - although NONE are as repulsive as the bibliolator Christians.

[Eleutheria]

Agreed, didn't Marx say that? I just read Christopher Hitchens book "God is Not Great" and he gives some convincing arguments, I was brought up as a Catholic and went to an English Catholic School in which there has been a huge paedophillia scandal, luckily I was never victimised. But I know some who were, and it's pretty much put me off religion for good. What would that Gallilean preacher thing now if he saw the extravagance, the pomposity and the pathetic half-apologies of the Roman Catholic Church today, and overall in my opinion Christianity has done far more harm than good. But as Freud said, religion will exist as long as humanity fears death.

I promise you that fear of death has NEVER been a contributing factor to my faith. Moreover, when I read hitchens I was put off by his extreme arrogance and how easily I could identify myself with his observations... meaning that I was a shitty person and that hitchens is wrong.

May I ask, what are the main factors contributing to your faith? (btw have u seen that intelligence squared debate in which Ann Widicome and Bishop Onayaken (For) and Stephen Fry and Christopher Hitchens (against) debated on the motion "Christianity is a force for good in the world"? The Bishop Onayaken-whom is supposedly a spokesperson for god was bumbling and semi-coherent, and miss widdicome was scaresley better)

[Kvatchdom]

For the people to find true happiness, false happiness(religion) must be abolished from our society. A god is a fool's explanation on things he/she cannot understand. I support freedom of religion, as long as the religion does not affect politics, since it's idiocy to push religious morals to societies with different beliefs.

Yes, I'm an Anti-Theist.

[Distruzio]

May I ask, what are the main factors contributing to your faith? (btw have u seen that intelligence squared debate in which Ann Widicome and Bishop Onayaken (For) and Stephen Fry and Christopher Hitchens (against) debated on the motion "Christianity is a force for good in the world"? The Bishop Onayaken-whom is supposedly a spokesperson for god was bumbling and semi-coherent, and miss widdicome was scaresley better)

No, I have never seen that. And you can find my explanation of my conversion in my first post in this thread.

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=154653&p=7866665&hilit=orthodox&sid=b6315f7f4fc4d7f687e3832cb28021c0#p7866665

[Socialdemokraterne]

For the people to find true happiness, false happiness(religion) must be abolished from our society. A god is a fool's explanation on things he/she cannot understand. I support freedom of religion, as long as the religion does not affect politics, since it's idiocy to push religious morals to societies with different beliefs.

Yes, I'm an Anti-Theist.

Do you not wish for the people to find true happiness? You just said that in order for the people (that is society, which is the aggregate of all people in an area as a community) to find happiness, religion must be abolished from said society. In your support of religious freedom you exhibit a lack of conviction to eliminate religion from society, thereby refusing to complete the task of giving true happiness to the people. So you either do not support true happiness for the people as you have defined it, or you only think you support religious freedom when you actually don't. Anything else is self-contradicting (save perhaps isolationism between the religious and the irreligious, in which case you're a Separatist who supports religious freedom, but not in your society).

Eliminating religion's influence on politics alone is not its abolition from society, it is merely an alteration of the political system said society exists under. The system is not the society, the people are the society. The system is the way people organize as a society. While you can categorize societies as "state societies" and so forth, you're simply categorizing groups of people (societies) based on their organizational structure when you do so. When you say "Finland is a Capitalist society", you're saying that Finns as a group have as one of their characteristics a Capitalist economic system. Capitalism is a characteristic, it is not the society itself any more than a red-headed person is red hair. In order to abolish religion from a society religious people must be removed.

Or perhaps my definition of "society" is flawed? It wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong about something, and if I am in this case I'm not going to freak out and get mad or deny it like a hypocrite.

[Third Mexican Empire]

I think some Christians forget what it is exactly that Jesus taught us

[Vetalia]

Honestly, if universal reconciliation were an established doctrine I'd be Christian...I just can't comprehend the logic behind eternal punishment for a temporal crime no matter how heinous. Other than that, I find it very inspiring and hopeful.

[Garya]

Excuse me,I meant to say fufill.My bad.Sorry folks.

Which changes the context of your post entirely, and makes your objection rather misplaced.

Excuse me for living Mr. Perfect. You looking for a fight? You hate Christianity, that is obvious to me by the way you criticize my points of view. I have respected your point of view, it is a horrible thing you can't respect others.

[Rynatia]

It was a beautiful religion, though it has been corrupted by man and greed like so many other things...

[Greater Tezdrian]

Although some fellows in my faith are bitter, I generally take the tolerant view. I heavily disagree with it's theology and methods; and I really dislike many saints in the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Anglican churches.

Tea, out of curiosity, where do you go to worship?

Worship and ritual is carried out in the home, before the lararium.

[Neutraligon]

Tea, out of curiosity, where do you go to worship?

Worship and ritual is carried out in the home, before the lararium.

lararium, what's that?

[Avenio]

Worship and ritual is carried out in the home, before the lararium.

lararium, what's that?

Basically a household altar, if memory serves. Generally placed near the hearth of Roman homes, I think they were built into cupboards or niches in the wall. They had statues of household deities, places for sacrifices/incense and the like.

[Neutraligon]

lararium, what's that?

Basically a household altar, if memory serves. Generally placed near the hearth of Roman homes, I think they were built into cupboards or niches in the wall. They had statues of household deities, places for sacrifices/incense and the like.

Thanks, now that you describe it I recognize it, I didn't realize it was related with Christianity.

[Avenio]

Thanks, now that you describe it I recognize it, I didn't realize it was related with Christianity.

It's not really related with Christianity, in any particular sense. Religions across the Mediterranean had household altars and deities of one sort or another; it seems to be something that's common to most religions the world over, really. I would imagine that Christian household altars had more to do with the fact that early Christians were not allowed to worship in public places and thus were forced to meet in secret, if at all, to pray. There might have been some cultural connections that carried over from the Greco-Roman religion, but I don't think it's that easy to draw conclusions one way or another.

[Neutraligon]

Thanks, now that you describe it I recognize it, I didn't realize it was related with Christianity.

It's not really related with Christianity, in any particular sense. Religions across the Mediterranean had household altars and deities of one sort or another; it seems to be something that's common to most religions the world over, really. I would imagine that Christian household altars had more to do with the fact that early Christians were not allowed to worship in public places and thus were forced to meet in secret, if at all, to pray. There might have been some cultural connections that carried over from the Greco-Roman religion, but I don't think it's that easy to draw conclusions one way or another.

makes sense

[AETEN II]

I hate all organized religion with a passion as it tends to simply just be a power scheme for a certain individual or group to quickly grab power, such as the Catholic Church. I respect those who see the bible as something to take apart and analyze for truths and not to be taken literally, but lack it for those who read it literally despite the fact its been edited, influenced, corrupted, censored, etc. countless times for over a thousand years. But in truth, and having a scientific mind, I cannot believe in any religion as I must first see solid proof in order to solidify their hypothesis as a theory. I do however remain agnostic, likely due to the fact that as a young child I was a Christian as my parents likely managed to sink some of it deep into my mind.

[Christmahanikwanzikah]

Honestly, if universal reconciliation were an established doctrine I'd be Christian...I just can't comprehend the logic behind eternal punishment for a temporal crime no matter how heinous. Other than that, I find it very inspiring and hopeful.

It's not exactly against doctrine, depending how you dissect it...

Calvinists like to argue that there is limited salvation, that only a select few people will be saved for eternity - which is true, to a point, but they fail to mention how large this "elected people" is. So I guess I support a "bastardization" of doctrines, of unlimited salvation that cannot be earned by works of faith.

[Christmahanikwanzikah]

Jesus is the idea and the mortal man.
If you are a Christian, you believe that Jesus was the Christ, ergo practically perfect.

No, it's Paulinists who believe that. Christians know better.

Who is your Christ, Bluth?

[Milks Empire]

No, it's Paulinists who believe that. Christians know better.

Who is your Christ, Bluth?

He's doing here as he did in the politics threads before my year-long hiatus - telling us we're all wrong and refusing to explain why in any useful detail.

[Christmahanikwanzikah]

Who is your Christ, Bluth?

He's doing here as he did in the politics threads before my year-long hiatus - telling us we're all wrong and refusing to explain why in any useful detail.

Eh, I figure he'll spill eventually.

[Halgrond]

Honestly, if universal reconciliation were an established doctrine I'd be Christian...I just can't comprehend the logic behind eternal punishment for a temporal crime no matter how heinous. Other than that, I find it very inspiring and hopeful.

I belive that the punishment will be final but not eternal. Those that recive it will be destroyed.

[Socialdemokraterne]

I belive that the punishment will be final but not eternal. Those that recive it will be destroyed.

There, see folks? You can't draw generalizations about Christianity with very much substance. This fellow I quoted has assumed a stance called Annihilationism, and while it's not a particularly big portion of Christian tradition (most follow a model of eternal torment), it is nevertheless a legitimate school thereof with a respectable following. It is not a school I agree with, I embrace the school of Universalism (which is, incidentally, by far the smallest school), but Annihilationism is a recognized school and has as much scriptural backing as my own.

And look how different our schools are! You can't say they're the same! My school teaches that by virtue of God's promise for a new Earth which has been cleansed of all evil and suffering, and further by Its nature as an omnibenevolent, omnipresent, and omnipotent being of pure good, universal reconciliation and rehabilitative punishment is necessary (making Hell more akin to the concept of Purgatory). Halgrond's school teaches that, by virtue of God's promise for a new Earth which has been cleansed of all evil and suffering, and further by an assumption that the damned would never separate from their sinful ways no matter how long you hypothetically gave them, sinners who have died must be eliminated outright so they don't corrupt the Kingdom of Heaven. That's a completely different stance on human nature, for crying out loud! Annihilationism assumes humans are inherently evil and must be constantly and forcefully steered toward good, Universalism assumes humans are inherently good but may need guidance to avoid doing evil without understanding it as such.

[Xsyne]

http://www.cracked.com/blog/4-things-bo ... op-saying/
read every single entry. You need it.

Read it. Every single entry. Found it amusing. My initial point still stands.

Edit: And just in case you think my initial point was a knee-jerk, atheistic response to theistic ignorance, think about this: I am fully aware that the Muslims were responsible for most, if not all, of the preservation and development of knowledge during the the dark ages. Islam, not xtianity.

The so-called "Dark Ages" never actually happened.