namelesstavern.net

This should be interesting especially for the non christians here.

If you had to choose which particular branch or sect of christianity you find most agreeable, which would you choose?


I can't decide myself.

On the one hand, the catholics are the originals. They invented (or created through divine inspiration if you believe) the bible. So I kind of find it funny that the protestants rebelled from catholicism by using (half) a book catholic priests wrote as the basis for their religion.

On the other hand, I find catholicism to be loony. It seems to have created a bunch of arbitrary rules that are basically designed to make people feel guilty as hell about their natural bodies and natural desires. The protestants are more accepting of things like sex. Sort of.

But on the other hand, the catholics say that both good works AND faith are required to get into heaven, which I like. I find it disturbing that a serial killer could get into heaven (according to protestant ideology) easily by simply accepting jesus before he died.

This is a really hard question. What do you think? :P

You forgot greek orthodox

Presbyterian.

do what every branch of christianity does

pick and chose the parts of the book you like and ignore the rest

On the one hand, the catholics are the originals. They invented (or created through divine inspiration if you believe) the bible.

I think the jewish folk will be dissappointed to hear that christians wrote the bible

Actually Catholic is not the original, nor did they create anything. Christians were followers of Christ, the original Christians. Christianity spread like wildfire in the years after Christs death at the hands of the Roman Empire.

I refuse to put my faith into one religeon. I believe there is a God, I believe there were prophet(s) of God. Who is "right" is not for me to decide. Follow the faith you want to follow if that makes you happy, but don't expect everyone to agree with you.

Yamori wrote:On the one hand, the catholics are the originals. They invented (or created through divine inspiration if you believe) the bible. So I kind of find it funny that the protestants rebelled from catholicism by using (half) a book catholic priests wrote as the basis for their religion.

On the other hand, I find catholicism to be loony. It seems to have created a bunch of arbitrary rules that are basically designed to make people feel guilty as hell about their natural bodies and natural desires. The protestants are more accepting of things like sex. Sort of.

But on the other hand, the catholics say that both good works AND faith are required to get into heaven, which I like. I find it disturbing that a serial killer could get into heaven (according to protestant ideology) easily by simply accepting jesus before he died.

This is a really hard question. What do you think? :P

I'm Catholic so I'm biased.

That said, religion is a matter of spiritual insight, and not one based on 'right' or wrong. The problem is so many want to be 'right'.

The real goal of religion is to make you a better person, and to infuse you with 'good' and 'compassion'. Those who try to make religion external versus internal are the ones who often alienate others, and create the unfortunate angst that prevents many from attaining true peace of their soul.

If you want an indepth discussion of Catholicism, PM me or hit one of their Forums. It is not intended to make you feel guilty and the rules are actually quite simple.

Concur with Lyion. I'm Catholic also. In fact Catholics opened mindness about sexuality is far more open than most Protestant religions, although we hold a strong view of contraception etc...

Your not going to hear a fair argument of Catholicism on this board. With a few of the posters we have here it is just impossible.

I grew up in the Baptist church, but here in later years, i've been having some changes in my thinking. So now I don't really know what "christian" religion is better. I myself believe in Christ as the savior, and believe that for me going through Christ is my way to being saved. However unlike most Christians I find that I can not condemn anyone else who grew up believing and continues to believe in another way to God. I think we all get caught up in wanting everyone to agree that our way or religion is the best way. Maybe it's just most important to believe in God/Greater being and strive to live a good life, whatever religion gets you there is a good religion in my book.

I'm all about worshipping at every Christian church.

for seriously

lyion wrote:The real goal of religion is to make you a better person, and to infuse you with 'good' and 'compassion'. Those who try to make religion external versus internal are the ones who often alienate others, and create the unfortunate angst that prevents many from attaining true peace of their soul.

I don't technically agree with this point. The purpose of our lives are to glorify God. He gets glory when his followers are shown his grace and mercy and He gets glory when others are shown his wrath.

The chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever. - Westminster Catechism

1 Cor. 10:31 Whether therefore ye eat or drink, or whatever ye do, do all to the glory of God.

Donnel wrote:

lyion wrote:The real goal of religion is to make you a better person, and to infuse you with 'good' and 'compassion'. Those who try to make religion external versus internal are the ones who often alienate others, and create the unfortunate angst that prevents many from attaining true peace of their soul.

I don't technically agree with this point. The purpose of our lives are to glorify God. He gets glory when his followers are shown his grace and mercy and He gets glory when others are shown his wrath.

The chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever. - Westminster Catechism

1 Cor. 10:31 Whether therefore ye eat or drink, or whatever ye do, do all to the glory of God.

Except my view is making oneself a better person and being selfless and compassionate is the true meaning of what you're reading, Don, glorifying God.

Not to mention what you are saying goes against the Beatitudes which most Christians agree is the underlining message of the New Testament.

It is the problem with many in Christianity nowadays that they see belief as a one dimensional aspect of life, versus an overview of compassion and the world.

Sermon on the Mount wrote:Therefore, whosoever heareth these words of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: and the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. And every one that heareth these words of mine, and doeth them not, I will liken unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: and the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it."

Arguing semantics I'd wager.

You say "Chief end of man is to become a better person thus glorifying God."

I say "Chief end of man is to glorify God, whether he's a good person or a vessel of God's wrath."

Sermon on the Mount wrote:Therefore, whosoever heareth these words of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: and the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. And every one that heareth these words of mine, and doeth them not, I will liken unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: and the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it."

The problem is many fundamentalists forget the Sermon is focused on four points, not one. All they care about is 'Their relationship with God'. Being God is more interested in our interaction with each other and in glorifying him through works of compassion and charity our views could not be farther apart.

Its a problem I have with the 'Born Again' concept, that focuses on false metaphors versus actual actions and events. To me being boastful and imbuing titles on oneself is about as far from Christlike as the Sermon wishes us to be.

In essencce, the born again view is evangelical and moreso that everything revolves around our attitude towards the Lord, and ensuring belief.

My view is the sermon promotes that everything revolves around our attitude toward ourselves, our attitude toward our sins, our attitude toward the Lord and our attitude toward the world. As the Sermon says, all of those things are equally important.

Unfortunately so many only see 1/4 of the message.

That's not really what I am saying though.

Answer this question: What is man's purpose in life

Donnel wrote:That's not really what I am saying though.

Answer this question: What is man's purpose in life

Self Destruction. Do your part to cleanse the world and kill yourself.

Yamori wrote:This should be interesting especially for the non christians here.

If you had to choose which particular branch or sect of christianity you find most agreeable, which would you choose?

Whichever one doesn't try to force itself upon me.

-Adam

"For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God--not because of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them"
(Ephesians 2:8-10)

David Koresh Christianity.

I'm Anglican. Which just means were Christians who don't like Catholics that much.

I don't really care much for either, though.

Yamori wrote:So I kind of find it funny that the protestants rebelled from catholicism by using (half) a book catholic priests wrote as the basis for their religion.

Note how I said HALF the bible. I'm not stupid, I know the other half is from our good ol friends the jews.

vonkaar wrote:I'm all about worshipping at every Christian church.

for seriously

mkay

YEAH JEWS ARE STR8 OLDSKOOL F'REAL.

Church of Elvis