welcome to the fest
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

would u sell ur soul?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> Sinfest
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Yorick



Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 12101
Location: In the undersnow

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 5:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Got ist ficticious dooshven bloogie!
_________________
Currently experiencing: not summer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Sojobo



Joined: 12 Jul 2006
Posts: 2466

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 5:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

donut3point5 wrote:
When you sell your soul, do you just go to hell when you die? OR are you void of life, but a corporate machine?

"Selling" souls only makes sense if souls can be meaningfully owned.

I don't think souls can be owned. Except in the way I totally own yours at Mortal Kombat III.
_________________
"To love deeply in one direction makes us more loving in all others."
- Anne-Sophie Swetchine
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MellowFish



Joined: 30 Sep 2006
Posts: 755
Location: The Train to Gloryland

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 5:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

falsedef wrote:
Major Tom wrote:
he's just denying that jesus died to wash away original sin...


...don't mind him.

There are plenty of fundies who believe we start life as sinners. Many baptists require acceptance of Jesus (John 3:16) before we're even given a chance to go to heaven -- babies are primed to burn in hell at conception. There's a bunch of other dogmatic rules, like Catholics requiring baptisms for salvation. Some sects require good deeds throughout life for worthy judgment, some require just faith in baby Jesus. This shouldn't be news to anyone on this board. Anyways, Mellow didn't claim himself to be a fundamentalist, he was referring to them, so he wasn't denying anything.

First: you switched baptists and catholics as far as dogma, and believing in salvation is pretty standard across the board.

Second: I would be very curious to know what 'sect' of chirstianity requires good deeds for entrance into heaven. And also which one requires faith in baby jesus.

Third: You just haven't been around long enough: I *am* the fundie christian on this corner of cyberspace. Though sojobo has the dogma down pat.
Quote:
If hell is real, it's just proof that God is unjust and no better than the devil. If god knows who's going to hell before we're even born, then why create bad people? That's just cruel.

This is the paradox of an omniscient god. It doen't mean god is cruel; it just means he is god and by his nature knows all.

As far as killing off people who wouldn't choose him anyway, that's my current belief on aborted babies. Doesn't make abortion right, but is ties up loose theological ends quite nicely.
_________________
Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. -- Frederick Douglass
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Yorick



Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 12101
Location: In the undersnow

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 5:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

so, everyone's soul is on loan?
_________________
Currently experiencing: not summer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Dro



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 3870

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 5:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MellowFish wrote:
As far as killing off people who wouldn't choose him anyway


That seems to be the reflex with religious types.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sojobo



Joined: 12 Jul 2006
Posts: 2466

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MellowFish wrote:
Though sojobo has the dogma down pat.

It makes me very nervous when you talk about me.
_________________
"To love deeply in one direction makes us more loving in all others."
- Anne-Sophie Swetchine
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MellowFish



Joined: 30 Sep 2006
Posts: 755
Location: The Train to Gloryland

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dont worry Sojobo, you dont have to worry about becoming a fundie until you reach rock bottom in life. Then the only place to go is left field with the rest of us. Very Happy
I was just impressed with your understanding of the chirstian version of the devil and hell. Twisted Evil
_________________
Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. -- Frederick Douglass
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sojobo



Joined: 12 Jul 2006
Posts: 2466

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MellowFish wrote:
Sojobo wrote:
MellowFish wrote:
Sojobo wrote:
What is it with you, anyway? Someone drop you on your fucking head?
On my head?
Well, yeah, what are they going to drop you on someone else's head?
How can they drop me onto my own head?
No, not onto your... what?... Goddamn it! Are you fucking with me?
_________________
"To love deeply in one direction makes us more loving in all others."
- Anne-Sophie Swetchine
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Brack Daddy



Joined: 01 Oct 2006
Posts: 4

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:43 am    Post subject: $$$ Reply with quote

"Now, you may encounter the devil's bargain if you get that far. Any old soul is worth saving, at least to a priest, but not every soul is worth buying--so you can take the offer as a compliment."
-William S. Burroughs

I always liked that quote.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
filecore



Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 929
Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: PHP error in MySQL at line 46

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 7:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lasairfiona wrote:
By making them do the walk of shame to the Bible, the teacher influenced how they view the Bible.

Not to mention it wasn't for missing homework, it was for not looking like a picture window while being forced to say the Lord's Prayer. This bad teaching example goes just a bit further than a math teacher. Either way, the teacher needed to be punish.


Okay I want to correct a few things here... I wasn't clear enough at the start.

1) it was not a religious school, it was a state school.
2) it was not a religious class, it was our teacher for the year and she started every class that way.
3) it didn't happen in Finland (the box says "location", not "origin", although I live here nowadays), it happened at a school in the UK.

I think that puts a lot of this into an interesting context. I would have mentioned this sooner but I've been busy working and haven't had time for the internet...

Incidentally, the website for the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland is www.evl.fi - read that quickly and see what it looks like :)


Last edited by filecore on Fri Dec 08, 2006 7:29 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
filecore



Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 929
Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: PHP error in MySQL at line 46

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 7:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

PinkSpider43 wrote:
Major Tom wrote:


Quote:
So worry not. Apparently in Finland what was being described WAS perfectly ok at the time, but is no longer.


uh-huh, but only as far as "teaching religion" is concerned.

as i've been saying, the topical matter doesn't matter. it's the teaching method that's actually being scrutinized -- the use of humiliation -- and what subject was being taught at the moment (regardless of what class was in session) doesn't change the acceptability (or unacceptability) of that teaching method.


Oh, sorry.

I thought it was an issue of "this teacher has no business putting religion in the classroom"


It was. See the above post.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
filecore



Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 929
Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: PHP error in MySQL at line 46

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 7:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

kame wrote:
You know what, I reverse my stance. I fully support religious education, comparative religious education. I'm especially interested in kids learning the meaning of the word 'Syncretism', and how it applies to Christianity, Islam, Judaism, among others.


Funnily enough, where I went to school (in the UK) was about 15 miles from the biggest Tibetan Buddhist monestary outside of Tibet. Our religious education classes were more interesting because they tended to focus on Buddhism and similar, more so than on Christianity, and they included field trips out to the monestary and stuff. It was fun to see orange-robed monke padding barefoot around the local supermarket, getting their shopping.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Major Tom



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 7563

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

filecore wrote:
PinkSpider43 wrote:
Major Tom wrote:


Quote:
So worry not. Apparently in Finland what was being described WAS perfectly ok at the time, but is no longer.


uh-huh, but only as far as "teaching religion" is concerned.

as i've been saying, the topical matter doesn't matter. it's the teaching method that's actually being scrutinized -- the use of humiliation -- and what subject was being taught at the moment (regardless of what class was in session) doesn't change the acceptability (or unacceptability) of that teaching method.


Oh, sorry.

I thought it was an issue of "this teacher has no business putting religion in the classroom"


It was. See the above post.

right, which is why i stated at the outset:
Major Tom wrote:

this whole vein of the conversation assumes that the child is not enrolled in a religious institution, of course.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
falsedef



Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Posts: 20

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MellowFish wrote:
falsedef wrote:
Major Tom wrote:
he's just denying that jesus died to wash away original sin...


...don't mind him.

There are plenty of fundies who believe we start life as sinners. Many baptists require acceptance of Jesus (John 3:16) before we're even given a chance to go to heaven -- babies are primed to burn in hell at conception. There's a bunch of other dogmatic rules, like Catholics requiring baptisms for salvation. Some sects require good deeds throughout life for worthy judgment, some require just faith in baby Jesus. This shouldn't be news to anyone on this board. Anyways, Mellow didn't claim himself to be a fundamentalist, he was referring to them, so he wasn't denying anything.

First: you switched baptists and catholics as far as dogma, and believing in salvation is pretty standard across the board.

Second: I would be very curious to know what 'sect' of chirstianity requires good deeds for entrance into heaven. And also which one requires faith in baby jesus.

Third: You just haven't been around long enough: I *am* the fundie christian on this corner of cyberspace. Though sojobo has the dogma down pat.
Quote:
If hell is real, it's just proof that God is unjust and no better than the devil. If god knows who's going to hell before we're even born, then why create bad people? That's just cruel.

This is the paradox of an omniscient god. It doen't mean god is cruel; it just means he is god and by his nature knows all.

As far as killing off people who wouldn't choose him anyway, that's my current belief on aborted babies. Doesn't make abortion right, but is ties up loose theological ends quite nicely.


No, I got it right. They aren't exclusive to each other, but John 3:16 is heavily favored in Baptists, and baptisms are required for salvation among Catholics (with more emphasis for them, despite Baptists having it in their name). There are cettain sects that do believe good deeds are how you enter heaven (though no sins are almost the same thing), such as certain liberal Methodists. The baby Jesus was just a joke, most Christian believe the book of John requires belief in Jesus to go to heaven (though, many also believe loving thy neighbor and the golden rule is good enough).

I know you're a more serious Christian -- I've been around a lot longer than people would suspect, before Sinfest broke off from Keenspot, and even before Keenspot was run in an abandoned school.

And the paradox smells of fallacy (not all Christians believe in an omnipresent god, too), either by being a creation of man or by mistranslation. Even if that logical flaw was somehow fixed, there's still other serious flaws involving information, thought, and the concept of eternity that's better left off for a philosophy and science discussion rather than religion.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Major Tom



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 7563

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

actually, catholics kinda renovated limbo back at vatican II...it's a second bathroom now.

original sin no longer keeps unbaptized babies from entering the kingdom.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> Sinfest All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 6 of 7

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group