What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

I prefer what A.J. Cronin wrote in "Keys of the Kingdom" regarding salvation of an atheist.
 
Re: Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

5mn_Major said:
Alright. Engineers are good people simply because they're engineers.
Click to expand...
FINALLY! Some sanity in this thread. :D



You believe in clinical and applied psychology because you don't believe in God? Not many would admit to that.
Click to expand...
Clearly, we're talking past each other. The statement I was responding to was "[Atheism] offers no self-help tool box," by which I thought you meant, "[not believing in god] offers no self help tool box," or, more cleanly, "if you don't believe in god, you won't have a self-help toolbox available." That is clearly false, so I was just pointing that out.


Unlike other Christians, I don't see atheism as 'bad'. But I do see it as really just an ideology of 'no' because it only stands for not God. Anything else are atheists trying to give it additional meaning that it just doesn't have.
Click to expand...
You routinely say that anything that does not flow directly from the Red Text is not part of Christianity. If it's not part of Christianity, then what is it part of? I go with "atheism" - i.e. "not God." Something is either religious or secular. Anything that does not flow from religious belief is, to me, part of atheism - that is, it stands alone, apart from belief in a religion. Clinical psychologists do their research not because of a belief in god nor because of a belief in not(god) - it is independent of religion. If it's not part of religion, then to me, it is part of atheism. If you're trying to argue that the self-help tools offered by clinical psychologists are somehow part of Christianity, I'd love to see how you link them back to the Red Text.
 
Re: Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

Running out of time so...

joecct said:
I prefer what A.J. Cronin wrote in "Keys of the Kingdom" regarding salvation of an atheist.
Click to expand...

Hoping to put you to work as most won't know that reference.

burd said:
I was being facetious, 5mn. I think atheism is widely mischaracterized, but I've never it to be under attack, any more than, as you say, christianity (or Christmas).
Click to expand...

Cool. Gotcha.

LynahFan said:
You routinely say that anything that does not flow directly from the Red Text is not part of Christianity. If it's not part of Christianity, then what is it part of? I go with "atheism" - i.e. "not God."
Click to expand...

As you say, I assign red text to Christianity (not as a monopoly, but frequent inspiration and motivation). But don't agree with your secular equals atheist definition. Maybe I've just assumed by atheism you've meant that when really you've meant secularism?
 
5mn_Major said:
As you say, I assign red text to Christianity (not as a monopoly, but frequent inspiration and motivation). But don't agree with your secular equals atheist definition. Maybe I've just assumed by atheism you've meant that when really you've meant secularism?
Click to expand...
Atheism just means that you think that 100% of things that exist (including abstractions such as love and beauty) are secular, so to me, the only difference between secularism and atheism is one of degree.
 
Kepler said:
Just don't be Pascal's Wager, please.
Click to expand...

Good God, no. I'm at a rink watching HS games. I'll do it tomorrow.

You'd like Fr. Chisholm. You'd also like Fr. Fermoyle from The Cardinal (the book. The movie is a piece of Otto Preminger trash)
 
Last edited:
Re: Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

OK. Here it is.

A bit of background. Fr. Francis Chisholm is a Catholic missionary in Pai-Tan, China early in the 20th century. The plague has come to Pai-Tan and Francis' childhood friend, Dr. Willie Tulloch (an atheist) comes to the town as part of a relief effort.

After getting a handle on the plague's spread, Willie catches it and dies. After Willie's death, Fr. Chisholm and Mother Mary Veronica have a discussion on whether Willie was saved. Here is the conclusion of Fr. Chisholm's thinking on the matter:

"...There is one thing we most of us forget. Christ taught it. The Church teaches it...though you wouldn't think so to hear a great many of us today. No one in good faith can ever be lost. No one. Buddhists, Mohammedans, Taoists...the blackest cannibals who ever devoured a missionary... If they are sincere, according to their own lights, they will be saved. That is the splendid mercy of God. So why shouldn't He enjoy confronting a decent agnostic at the Judgement Seat with a twinkle in his eye: 'I'm here you see, in spite of all they brought you up to believe. Enter the Kingdom which you honestly denied.'..."
Click to expand...

And now, on the Eve of Christmas - the Last Gospel (John 1:14)
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him: and without Him was made nothing that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. And the Light shineth in darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. This man came for a witness, to give testimony of the Light, that all men might believe through Him. He was not the Light, but was to give testimony of the Light. That was the true Light, which enlighteneth every man that cometh into this world. He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him not.

He came unto His own, and His own received Him not. But as many as received Him, He gave them power to be made the sons of God, to them that believe in His name. Who are born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. (here all kneel)


AND THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH AND DWELT AMONG US,


and we saw His glory, the glory as it were of the Only Begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Re: Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

dxmnkd316 said:
You could, but you'd look pretty silly given we live in a secular nation.
Click to expand...

The point is not about secular (i.e., I could have said nonbeliever). The point is about the label sharia. Extremists label - communist, socialist, sharia - examples of individual behavior to continuously misrepresent whole groups. Replace Christian with black or Jew and posters doing this would be thrown off the boards.

Atheism has nothing to do with bigotry. But as with Christians, atheists can be bigots.
 
Re: Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

5mn_Major said:
The point is not about secular (i.e., I could have said nonbeliever). The point is about the label sharia. Extremists label - communist, socialist, sharia - examples of individual behavior to continuously misrepresent whole groups. Replace Christian with black or Jew and posters doing this would be thrown off the boards.

Atheism has nothing to do with bigotry. But as with Christians, atheists can be bigots.
Click to expand...
Sharia means "the way" or "the path," and is the manner in which a Muslim is supposed to conduct him/herself according to the Quran, which could also be a called "the Word of God."

Calling something Christian Sharia when people want to apply the Bible to laws used to conduct secular life might seem inflammatory, but it's still fairly accurate.
 
Re: Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

5mn_Major said:
The point is not about secular (i.e., I could have said nonbeliever). The point is about the label sharia. Extremists label - communist, socialist, sharia - examples of individual behavior to continuously misrepresent whole groups. Replace Christian with black or Jew and posters doing this would be thrown off the boards.

Atheism has nothing to do with bigotry. But as with Christians, atheists can be bigots.
Click to expand...
Man you have a fixation on atheists. I am at a loss for why you need to define them so much
St. Clown said:
Sharia means "the way" or "the path," and is the manner in which a Muslim is supposed to conduct him/herself according to the Quran, which could also be a called "the Word of God."

Calling something Christian Sharia when people want to apply the Bible to laws used to conduct secular life might seem inflammatory, but it's still fairly accurate.
Click to expand...
In the Bible there is also "The Way" which I am sure was translated out of whatever language it was written in first. Not sure but if you have a Bible translated in that language it is possible that would be the wording used for "The Way"
 
Re: Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

St. Clown said:
Sharia means "the way" or "the path," and is the manner in which a Muslim is supposed to conduct him/herself according to the Quran, which could also be a called "the Word of God."

Calling something Christian Sharia when people want to apply the Bible to laws used to conduct secular life might seem inflammatory, but it's still fairly accurate.
Click to expand...

A proposal by a noted right winger on a single issue is stretched by label to be a pervasive religious rule of law 'prescribing both religious and secular duties with retributive penalties'. While inflammatory, that's not close to accurate.
 
Re: Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

5mn_Major said:
A proposal by a noted right winger on a single issue is stretched by label to be a pervasive religious rule of law 'prescribing both religious and secular duties with retributive penalties'. While inflammatory, that's not close to accurate.
Click to expand...

A person wanted to apply the Bible to secular life. That person want to make the Christian religious text "the way" of life. Again, the use of Sharia may be inflammatory due to it being the Arab term for "the way," but it's hardly inaccurate.

You just don't like it because others are calling out this Christian zealotry for the POS proposal that it is, making apt analogies to a religion that people of your faith like to call "a cult." Get over it.
 
Re: Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

5mn_Major said:
The point is not about secular (i.e., I could have said nonbeliever). The point is about the label sharia. Extremists label - communist, socialist, sharia - examples of individual behavior to continuously misrepresent whole groups. Replace Christian with black or Jew and posters doing this would be thrown off the boards.

Atheism has nothing to do with bigotry. But as with Christians, atheists can be bigots.
Click to expand...

I was actually just being a pis-sant. I do that sometimes. I'm sorry.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top