Warmark Jay wrote: Misinterpreted your comments - my apologies. And I agree with you about doubt and faith, although that kind of talk will get you kicked out of the Bloodguard.





Moderator: Fist and Faith
Warmark Jay wrote: Misinterpreted your comments - my apologies. And I agree with you about doubt and faith, although that kind of talk will get you kicked out of the Bloodguard.
I offer you a quote from my favorite play, "A Man For All Seasons" about my hero Sir Thomas More who was killed, if you didn't already know, in England for not accepting Henry VIII as head of the Church of England and later canonized as a Catholic saint.what I don't do is reject dogma because I don't believe in it.
Norfolk: I'm not a scholar, as Master Cromwell never tires of pointing out, and frankly I don't know whether the marriage was lawful or not. But damn it, Thomas, look at those names...You know those men! Can't you do what I did, and come with us, for fellowship?
More: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship?
duchess of malfi wrote:Likewise the United Methodist Church.
I'm not sure that this is really the right definition. Creeds aren't oaths--they're statements of belief. There's a difference between pledging to believe and simply stating what you believe. As I said, I stopped going to church when I realized that I didn't know if I believed what I was saying or not, but that was a personal decision. Other people might make different choices--for some people, working through a crisis of faith by maintaining the outward observances even while their own beliefs are struggling is simply the best way to go.lurch wrote: think there is a pattern here. Each demanding a " Loyalty Oath" in effect from its members. It strikes me same as Feudalism and or Nationalism
It seems that way sometimes. But every single Catholic I know uses birth control, except for the ones who are too old or too young to need it. That makes them sinners in the eyes of the Church; it doesn't make them not Catholic.Avatar wrote:the over-riding opinion seems to be that you can't be a member of any church without cleaving to all their beliefs, dogmas, etc.
--Avatar
The difficulty with this idea is that people are infinitely inventive in recasting the idea of God to suit their own prejudices. There are those who hear 'God' in their Rice Krispies, telling them to blow up buildings. There are those who find 'God' in their fantasies, telling them to use other people as sex toys, wrecking their emotional and physical health in the process. There are those who find 'God' in their pocketbooks, telling them to lie, cheat, steal, and manipulate their way to easy millions. All these are 'deeply personal relationships between that person and his/her God', and they're sure as hell 'unfiltered by those who would presume to speak for Him'. That doesn't make them true, or good, or useful. And it doesn't mean that those personal gods have anything to do with the real God.Warmark Jay wrote:I prefer to think that a relationship with whatever God one believes in is deeply personal, and should be between that person and his/her God, unfiltered by the interpretations and rules of those who would presume to speak for Him...or Her. If that makes me a sinner, or puts me on the short list to Hell, well, I'll take my chances.
Variol Farseer wrote: Human beings, I fear, will worship any damned thing. I mean that quite literally.
Yep, my point exactly...Human beings, I fear, will worship any damned thing. I mean that quite literally
One could say that about the guy(s) who wrote the Bible. What makes one group's interpretation of the Divine more valid than another? How is believing that God speaks through, say, a head of lettuce any less odd than saying that God spoke via a burning bush? Believers of any religion will simply answer, to the point that I brought up earlier, "because MY God is the true God."The difficulty with this idea is that people are infinitely inventive in recasting the idea of God to suit their own prejudices.