Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

I am religious and believe in free will

71 (27.7%)

I am religious and do not believe in free will

10 (3.9%)

I am not religious and believe in free will

114 (44.5%)

I am not religious and do not believe in free will

61 (23.8%)

Total Members Voted: 251

[Frumple]

Perhaps. But I'm pretty damn certain treating the Book of Mormon as de-facto scripture is right out.

Um, no? Or at least that'd be a rather odd line to draw -- christian sects have been splitting off due to believing this text or that text is canonical or not since ever, and one would still call 'em christian sects. Differences over believing various texts are holy has been a pretty bog standard christian thing more or less since the beginning, straight up including various ones doing their own little 'let's canonize our fanfiction' thing.

Hell, that's pretty much a standard feature of all the major religions. Only real difference with mormonism is it's recent, and that's really kind of a terrible objection to the practice, imo.

[mastahcheese]

who was supposedly ordained by Jesus himself, or at least his hologram. (You have to look up the story of Joseph Smith for that little tidbit.)

omg when they got to that part in the little movie they showed us at that baptism I really couldn't decide whether to punch someone or burst out laughing because the situation came so far out of left field.

Highlight had to be when Jojo was walking out of all the churches, with the narrator saying something along the lines of "and Joseph could not find himself satisfied by what the churches were preaching" and then right before he closes the door the pastor says "You absolutely have to look in the bible for these religious answers" and jojo just closes the door like "fuck it i'll just make up my own answers."

Well at least the priest wasn't feeding him bullcrap to bend him towards his political biases.

That is a good point. He was trying to honestly help, rather than just "Believe what I tell you to believe!"
Wonder what the look on his face was, when Smith came back, proclaimed to have met Jesus.

[Arcvasti]

by Santa himself.

Best typo ever.

Edit: Ninja'd.

It was not a typo.

Spoiler: Relevent (click to show/hide)

[ggamer]

Um, no? Or at least that'd be a rather odd line to draw -- christian sects have been splitting off due to believing this text or that text is canonical or not since ever, and one would still call 'em christian sects. Differences over believing various texts are holy has been a pretty bog standard christian thing more or less since the beginning, straight up including various ones doing their own little 'let's canonize our fanfiction' thing.

I'm not aware of any sects off the top of my head (aside from mormonism), i'm guessing these come from the early church era?

Only real difference with mormonism is it's recent, and that's really kind of a terrible objection to the practice, imo.

I don't really understand the point here. If any sect were to take a scripture aside from the bible (and honor it the same as the bible), then they aren't christians, how recent they are doesn't play into it.

[Cryxis, Prince of Doom]

by Santa himself.

Best typo ever.

Edit: Ninja'd.

It was not a typo.

Spoiler: Relevent (click to show/hide)

Is that making fun of the awesome line from 'they live'?

[smjjames]

Um, no? Or at least that'd be a rather odd line to draw -- christian sects have been splitting off due to believing this text or that text is canonical or not since ever, and one would still call 'em christian sects. Differences over believing various texts are holy has been a pretty bog standard christian thing more or less since the beginning, straight up including various ones doing their own little 'let's canonize our fanfiction' thing.

I'm not aware of any sects off the top of my head (aside from mormonism), i'm guessing these come from the early church era?

A lot of them were from the early church era (like gnostics), but theres some modern ones. Though you would know them as denominations rather than sects, that is, the protestant branches, and possibly the Orthodox group.

The only real difference between a sect and a denomination (or variant offshoot) is that from the church's perspecive, one is heretical and one isn't.

[Cryxis, Prince of Doom]

Heretical?

[Arcvasti]

Only real difference with mormonism is it's recent, and that's really kind of a terrible objection to the practice, imo.

I don't really understand the point here. If any sect were to take a scripture aside from the bible (and honor it the same as the bible), then they aren't christians, how recent they are doesn't play into it.

Christianity is defined as believing what is stated in the Nicene Creed. The early church decided the criteria for it at their summit in Nicea. That was what led to the heretic punching I mentioned in my previous post. St. Nicholas, who later mutated into Santa, slugged one of the council members because he'd put forward the idea that the Old Testament God was a separate and lesser entity then the one in the New Testament[Which is not an entirely unreasonable perspective TBH]. I don't know enough about Mormonism to judge whether or not their beliefs align with the Nicene Creed or not, but adding or subtracting books from the Bible doesn't make them automatically non-Christian. Maccabees is not present in many Protestent Bibles and Revelation was pretty controversial for a while and yet I don't see very many people saying that THEY aren't Christians.

[Frumple]

I'm not aware of any sects off the top of my head (aside from mormonism), i'm guessing these come from the early church era?

Nnoooo...? Roman Catholic. Baptist. Methodist. Eastern Orthodox. Etc., so forth so on. These are all christian sects. Denomination is more or less a synonym for the word.

@smj, I wouldn't say there's any functional difference at all, personally. I'll give that the sects themselves do prefer to avoid the word due to how they've used it to defame other groups, but...

I don't really understand the point here. If any sect were to take a scripture aside from the bible (and honor it the same as the bible), then they aren't christians, how recent they are doesn't play into it.

... well, congratulations, you've just labeled both protestantism and catholicism "aren't christian". Actually, I think you just managed to paint the whole religion as not the religion -- pretty much every christian sect takes texts outside the bible (which, itself, is just what the original _catholic church(es) decided it was) as equally or near-equally important. And even then you've got ones that argue the canonicity of things like Revelations, and all the other doctrinal and so forth conflicts. Christian belief pulls whole hosts of junk from extra-biblical sources, pretty much unilaterally across the various groups.

[mastahcheese]

What Frumple said.

I'd even continue it (and simultaneously reroute it back into Mormonism) by pointing out that from their point of view, the Book of Mormon isn't even distinguished from the Bible, as they view it as a continuation of the Bible.
Where the Old Testament is Book 1, New Testament is Book 2, and Book of Mormon is Book 3.
It's a trilogy.

So they definition of what the Bible even is is still up from debate.

[freeformschooler]

I don't really understand the point here. If any sect were to take a scripture aside from the bible (and honor it the same as the bible), then they aren't christians, how recent they are doesn't play into it.

... well, congratulations, you've just labeled both protestantism and catholicism "aren't christian". Actually, I think you just managed to paint the whole religion as not the religion -- pretty much every christian sect takes texts outside the bible (which, itself, is just what the original _catholic church(es) decided it was) as equally or near-equally important. And even then you've got ones that argue the canonicity of things like Revelations, and all the other doctrinal and so forth conflicts. Christian belief pulls whole hosts of junk from extra-biblical sources, pretty much unilaterally across the various groups.

As well they should. It seems awfully self-destructive to hold the pretense that your religion is so completely maladaptive that it cannot even incorporate new events past the first book. Despite all its other quibbles, this is one thing Catholicism got right: not only do they have extra books of the Bible, they also document their history, both the good and the bad, across multiple cultures and countries. Going in the other direction means freezing Christianity in place (hence all this "all you need is the Bible" doctrine that Protestant fundamentalists have taken up).

Of course there will always be quibbles on what books are canon and what are not. The Gospel of Thomas being a notable example.

[smjjames]

Heretical?

From the Church's perspective.

[ggamer]

I'm not aware of any sects off the top of my head (aside from mormonism), i'm guessing these come from the early church era?

Nnoooo...? Roman Catholic. Baptist. Methodist. Eastern Orthodox. Etc., so forth so on. These are all christian sects. Denomination is more or less a synonym for the word.

Okay, what I meant was a denomination/sect that had differences in religious text, but we're a bit past that now I guess

I don't really understand the point here. If any sect were to take a scripture aside from the bible (and honor it the same as the bible), then they aren't christians, how recent they are doesn't play into it.

... well, congratulations, you've just labeled both protestantism and catholicism "aren't christian". Actually, I think you just managed to paint the whole religion as not the religion -- pretty much every christian sect takes texts outside the bible (which, itself, is just what the original _catholic church(es) decided it was) as equally or near-equally important. And even then you've got ones that argue the canonicity of things like Revelations, and all the other doctrinal and so forth conflicts. Christian belief pulls whole hosts of junk from extra-biblical sources, pretty much unilaterally across the various groups.

Am I missing something here? Because i'm super confused by this and it's pretty embarrassing that I am. Well, I might as well start with what I know and see where I end up.

Like, I get what you're saying about the canonicity of certain books (i.e. Revelations). However, most of the differences between Christian denominations come from differing interpretations of what the bible says, not from arguments over what is and is not part of the bible (at least after the era of the early catholic churches).

Christian belief pulls whole hosts of junk from extra-biblical sources, pretty much unilaterally across the various groups.

Okay seriously colour me confused because I have no idea what you're talking about. Either i'm ignorant (a very real possibility, mind you), or you're mixing up the idea of pulling interpretations of the bible from extra-biblical sources with holding texts on the same level as the bible.

As well they should. It seems awfully self-destructive to hold the pretense that your religion is so completely maladaptive that it cannot even incorporate new events past the first book. Despite all its other quibbles, this is one thing Catholicism got right: not only do they have extra books of the Bible, they also document their history, both the good and the bad, across multiple cultures and countries. Going in the other direction means freezing Christianity in place (hence all this "all you need is the Bible" doctrine that Protestant fundamentalists have taken up).

okay now I know I fucked up somewhere. This would be the first time i've heard anything about Catholicism accepting other books outside the bible as canonical.

EDIT: I edited out my response to the last part because i don't really know what i'm talking about.

[Bohandas]

I'm not aware of any sects off the top of my head (aside from mormonism), i'm guessing these come from the early church era?

Nnoooo...? Roman Catholic. Baptist. Methodist. Eastern Orthodox. Etc.

Don't forget Rastafarianism, the belief that the Ethopian king Tafari Makonnen was the second coming of Jesus Christ.

[That Wolf]

I'm not aware of any sects off the top of my head (aside from mormonism), i'm guessing these come from the early church era?

Nnoooo...? Roman Catholic. Baptist. Methodist. Eastern Orthodox. Etc.

Don't forget Rastafarianism, the belief that the Ethopian king Tafari Makonnen was the second coming of Jesus Christ.

I second this bill.

Also out of curiosity, who chose mushroom, cause it wasnt me. I havnt picked yet.
Its like being in an icecream shop with hundreds of types of vanilla.