Denominations

That's a pretty strong reaction for something that's typed online, anyway, I did think that you were taking that perspective and responded to that, my mistake maybe but in 99.9% cases that's generally what's meant. I make judgements all the time and I'm fine with it, I know just how judgemental most people are from studying psychology and from experience, the majority who suggest they are reserving judgement or who go further and suggest they are completely judgement free are bluffing themselves and everyone else. If all things are equal and judgements are wrongful then how do you make any sort of choice and why would any differentiation between organised and disorganised or unorganised religion be necessary in the first place?

I'm not sure but I think you said you were Christian, although there's relevence even if you are not because it pretty much serves in the case of all religious leaders, movements and scriptures but Jesus, the disciples and many of the precursors and those writing after his life and ministry judged the shit out of peoples relationships with their God and they were right to.

And what does all this have to do with the price of tea in China, exactly?

You made a rude and uncalled for assumption, I called you out on it, and now you're giving me an aggressive diatribe about how everyone judges people. I still have no clue what about my previous post inspired you to assume I had anything against organized religion other than you projecting that view and judging me for something that you've conjured up in your own head all by your onesies.

Anyway, to be honest with you, I don't even know what point you're trying to make. If you're trying to engage me in a heated debate about my views on religion and the divine, you're barking up the wrong tree.
 
And what does all this have to do with the price of tea in China, exactly?

You made a rude and uncalled for assumption, I called you out on it, and now you're giving me an aggressive diatribe about how everyone judges people. I still have no clue what about my previous post inspired you to assume I had anything against organized religion other than you projecting that view and judging me for something that you've conjured up in your own head all by your onesies.

Anyway, to be honest with you, I don't even know what point you're trying to make. If you're trying to engage me in a heated debate about my views on religion and the divine, you're barking up the wrong tree.

in you profile, at the MBTI, doesn't say "judge me"? speaking of irony...
 
in you profile, at the MBTI, doesn't say "judge me"? speaking of irony...

Hah!

Except the word 'MBTI' preceding 'judge me' gives it context. You wouldn't be scratching your head if someone came out of left field and suddenly said you hated kittens? Yeah.
 
in you profile, at the MBTI, doesn't say "judge me"? speaking of irony...

Some posts dont require a response.

They are a stand alone indictment of the poster and if not immediately will eventually prove an embarrassment to them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: the
I converted to Orthodoxy (american orthodox) a few years ago. I have stopped attending out of laziness.

I converted after being Lutheran (mid teens) then nondenominational (til about 20ish) then being part of a cult. After that I was part of Assemblies of God, Pentecostal and baptist. Then I took a class on bible.org which I found inspirational and looked into RCC and orthodoxy. Then I started to feel a pull towards both of these. After a time I ignored them both and dabbled in Tao, Buddhism, and fortune telling. I read about the emergent church and had a stint as an agnostic/atheist. Then I came home to orthodoxy.


id say the main things that swayed me were some very knowledgeable debaters on a website called protestwarrior.com and other Christian websites like carm.org. The thought that we do not need evidence and to be certain of everything is appealing to me. I've had no desire to change my mind on the matter or even consider any alternative religious thought since.
 
[MENTION=4115]Lark[/MENTION] I think that as neat as Marx may have been, his conceptual inventions have been used the same way that Tesla's have. Everything beneficial to humanity was gutted and the remaining framework used to perpetuate evil.

Cultural Marxism is fucked up, and so are it's echo-chambers that we refer to as "universities."
 
@Lark I think that as neat as Marx may have been, his conceptual inventions have been used the same way that Tesla's have. Everything beneficial to humanity was gutted and the remaining framework used to perpetuate evil.

Cultural Marxism is fucked up, and so are it's echo-chambers that we refer to as "universities."

I dont know how there can be such a thing as cultural marxism, Marx's sociology suggested that the economy was real and all else, unreal, all else was a superstructure built upon the economic foundation, so what the economy needs, the superstructure evolves or forms to facilitate, enable and deliver.

It was Weber that suggested that culture was a more powerful, formative factor than this, he was writing contra Marx and said that sociology in his day was an argument with Marx, he used examples such as Hindu norms and mores of marriage and status or the protestant work ethic to demonstrate that norms and mores are not dictated by the economy alone and can actually dictate economic outcomes.

What is described as cultural marxism is nothing more than a right wing strawman, a cut out target or paper tiger, it suits them entirely because its the new enemy, same as the old enemy and it fits into the game of cowboys and indians they want to play more than it does reality, the same as conspiracy theorists saying that everything, communism, fascism, all the different and opposing extremes are really all part of the single same sheme by the single same group of individuals all the way down the years.

A real marxist cultural critique would suggest that the very developments that conservatives find culturally despicable are a logical consequence of the fiscal conservatism that most conservatives simply can not quit. They are also ideologically attuned to the wave length of permissive liberals and everything has its price free market libertarians than the sorts of humanism which apparently underpinned the thinking of Marx and Engels (I actually think Engels is more important than Marx).
 
same shit. its basically the work of the Devil and even those "stupid right wingers" can see it. we all know something is fucky in society. my poor self control is the reason im reacting to this xulture and fucked ideologies by being the village drunk.


basically just fucking google it
 
I converted to Orthodoxy (american orthodox) a few years ago. I have stopped attending out of laziness.

I converted after being Lutheran (mid teens) then nondenominational (til about 20ish) then being part of a cult. After that I was part of Assemblies of God, Pentecostal and baptist. Then I took a class on bible.org which I found inspirational and looked into RCC and orthodoxy. Then I started to feel a pull towards both of these. After a time I ignored them both and dabbled in Tao, Buddhism, and fortune telling. I read about the emergent church and had a stint as an agnostic/atheist. Then I came home to orthodoxy.


id say the main things that swayed me were some very knowledgeable debaters on a website called protestwarrior.com and other Christian websites like carm.org. The thought that we do not need evidence and to be certain of everything is appealing to me. I've had no desire to change my mind on the matter or even consider any alternative religious thought since.

I think this is so reflective of the zeitgheist or what I see on a much more vast scale, I'd not be surprised if the Simpsons wrote a story line in which Lisa Simpson reconverts to sunday school from zen buddhism.

I know the protestwarrior scene but I never considered it Christian at all, more of a looney right wing movement which trolled the worst examples of left wing PC protest, in parts of Europe they're just considered some kind of hobby group for CIA or other US embassy staff.

The thing about the various denominations of protestant Christianity is that I cant understand why this kind of faith "shopping" doesnt happen more often, it seems almost natural if you consider that all institutions have parity and one is as valid as the next that you would only naturally gravitate from one to the other. Having been brought up in the RCC by pretty observant parents but a family and community which are not devout in the sense of many of the US RCC scenes I've observed on facebook or elsewhere (seriously it is like a whole other world, a world apart, in which strict observance of some pretty medieval calenders, schedules etc. has a great deal more paramountcy than I would give them) I couldnt treat anything as a substitute. I could be interested but they would never prove to be an alternative just something else or another tendency.

Mind you it doesnt mean I'm strictly observant or abide by all doctrine and dogma in my opinion or my life.
 
Faith shopping is not very faithful. If you can trivially flip back and forth between different kinds of Christianity and Buddhism and all that, then why even bother? That's not faith, that's not belief. It's probably not very authentic either.

Unless you admit it, like I do. Belief is a tool and I change my mind all the time. That's not cool among the Christians that I personally grew up with. You're not to change your mind or lose faith (because everyone else is wrong)

I don't want to stop on any particular thing just because I'm tired of looking. Why bother? I can convince myself to stick with any decision if I want to so what difference does it make if I stick with Buddhism and refuse to doubt it, or stick with Christianity and refuse to doubt it? If I'm sticking to my guns just because, it kind of makes them both devoid of truth and meaning. It becomes nothing more than a badge. Some mental decorations. Derived sanctioning and excuses to do this or not do that. What difference does it make when you do it like that?
 
explains a lot.

Are you sure?
Who is to fault for me, me or pentecostalism as a denominations?

Pentecostalism is a denomination in christianity. Its purpose is not to make bad people, or people that you supposedly have a problem with. Don't make that mistake that superficial people made before you.
 
Faith shopping is not very faithful. If you can trivially flip back and forth between different kinds of Christianity and Buddhism and all that, then why even bother? That's not faith, that's not belief. It's probably not very authentic either.

Unless you admit it, like I do. Belief is a tool and I change my mind all the time. That's not cool among the Christians that I personally grew up with. You're not to change your mind or lose faith (because everyone else is wrong)

I don't want to stop on any particular thing just because I'm tired of looking. Why bother? I can convince myself to stick with any decision if I want to so what difference does it make if I stick with Buddhism and refuse to doubt it, or stick with Christianity and refuse to doubt it? If I'm sticking to my guns just because, it kind of makes them both devoid of truth and meaning. It becomes nothing more than a badge. Some mental decorations. Derived sanctioning and excuses to do this or not do that. What difference does it make when you do it like that?
be aware to not finish your doubting cards...there aren't much of them you know. After some time, you doubt and you doubt over and over again, until you finish your cards. Ultimately you have to believe something, and actualy you will believe something. To be more correct, you are right now believing and have faith on something...so...
 
[MENTION=6917]sprinkles[/MENTION]
I found a better way to phrase this...you have faith in doubting. You are very faithful. Long life to your faithful faith!
 
be aware to not finish your doubting cards...there aren't much of them you know. After some time, you doubt and you doubt over and over again, until you finish your cards. Ultimately you have to believe something, and actualy you will believe something. To be more correct, you are right now believing and have faith on something...so...

I dont really understand what faith is without doubt, maybe blind faith, I dont think that's useful or realistic either.

In my faith we have prayers to deal with doubt and its accepted its part and parcel of life, there's some of the monastic rules and traditions which have gradiated levels of faith and belief which stretch from the simple to the complex through stages of doubt and reaffirmation of belief, although maybe not every religious tradition is like this.

I've met evangelicals and born again Christians who I suspect are individually and as communities over compensating for secret doubts who say incredible things, like their beliefs are so sure and love of Jesus so great that they would like to/be happy to die which I tend to think is very different to saying you are prepared to face up to inevitable death with courage and hope.

Those kinds of cultures for denying doubt, which I think is part of the human condition (I actually think that original sin can be understood as the intrinsic doubt and denial in the human condition), are likely to stoke athiestic rebellion or reinforce it by making it seem "sensible" and with the ring of truth.
 
be aware to not finish your doubting cards...there aren't much of them you know. After some time, you doubt and you doubt over and over again, until you finish your cards. Ultimately you have to believe something, and actualy you will believe something. To be more correct, you are right now believing and have faith on something...so...

Oh really. What does it do for me?

And no, I don't have faith. Belief is a tool. As far as I'm concerned it doesn't have to be justified, or proven, or even true, so long as it is useful to me. So I don't really require faith because the actual trueness of my belief is irrelevant to me - at least in the case of religious matters.
 
All I have to say is that since October, I've had the experience of being UNABLE to not believe in God as I know Him.

That is amazing, considering I was raised in church with many complex rituals and yet had no idea what was going on most of the time. You can call it personal testimony or whatever you wish. I simply cannot disbelieve no matter what I do, think, or feel, and this amazes me almost daily. I'm not what you'd consider "devout," either. But for this gift I am thankful, and a lot of my urge for self improvement involves my increasing the ability to describe my testimony, why it has produced such results, and how it can help someone younger who is struggling with those BIG questions, or even dealing with a feeling of pointlessly drifting through life. What I want to do is preach the "gospel" as I know it, and being paid for doing so will be the end of anything worthy. It must be voluntary, there is no greed behind this. I especially want to use what nebulous, ambiguous gnowledge I've earned to help the mislead youth, especially young boys who may relate to me, in their walks of life, faith, and experience. I want them to meet their full potential, and I want to do it right. In my walk this is what I'm building towards. Perhaps merely being a father is the way i want to do it, perhaps instead i want it to affect a broader audience. I just know that in my culture, there is a surplus of young boys who lack positive masculine role models, and I want to be such a role model to them, and a mediator of sorts to a deep well of confidence and inspiration.

My denomination? Hard to say. I think that many denominations are based on something silly and focus their whole ministry around it. Egotistical is how I would describe many churches and temples who have strayed from the core of teaching that got them started in the first place. I think that many churches are unintriguing, clicky, or generally not interesting to young people. I'd like to be a catalyst of change for this, in any way that I can. I've had good experiences in a particular church in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada called Bethel Gispel Tabernacle. Another church that I'm new to but has given me a great impression is Beach Corner Evangelical Church near Stony Plain, Alberta, Canada. A Polish Roman Catholic Church in Edmonton had a thought provoking and refreshingly humourous mass two Sundays ago, but I do not know of their programs or community much comared to the aforementioned two. I've been to a few Buddhist temples but haven't found any that strike me yet. But I will keep my eyes open, and remember that the tewchings of Buddha have never been taught to me much through other people but more so through my own readings for the most part. In the end, I prefer any church that hasn't corrupted or taken to extremes the teaching of Jesus, Buddha, or whoever else taught the Truth. As long as pastors and teachers can understand the simple message behind the Bible and it's traditional moral codes, the true and powerful message of Love Almighty, then it sits well with me. There IS an underlying theme in all of this, I do believe that. I am not the adequate wordsmith to elaborate much on my faith, and instead I most highly wish that through my actions I can show my Love, and teach people through what I am doing.

A wise man once said something like this: "Preach the gospel always, and when necessary use words."

Those are some words to live by, and all of my struggles I accept as chapters in the great lesson. And this lesson I will preach through my own inadequacies, my efforts toward self improvement, and my step-by-step walk through a life lived in the name of Our Father, Love Transcendent, The Absolute Truth, The Borneless One Beyond the Night Of Time...
 
Last edited:
I think this is so reflective of the zeitgheist or what I see on a much more vast scale, I'd not be surprised if the Simpsons wrote a story line in which Lisa Simpson reconverts to sunday school from zen buddhism.

I know the protestwarrior scene but I never considered it Christian at all, more of a looney right wing movement which trolled the worst examples of left wing PC protest, in parts of Europe they're just considered some kind of hobby group for CIA or other US embassy staff.

The thing about the various denominations of protestant Christianity is that I cant understand why this kind of faith "shopping" doesnt happen more often, it seems almost natural if you consider that all institutions have parity and one is as valid as the next that you would only naturally gravitate from one to the other. Having been brought up in the RCC by pretty observant parents but a family and community which are not devout in the sense of many of the US RCC scenes I've observed on facebook or elsewhere (seriously it is like a whole other world, a world apart, in which strict observance of some pretty medieval calenders, schedules etc. has a great deal more paramountcy than I would give them) I couldnt treat anything as a substitute. I could be interested but they would never prove to be an alternative just something else or another tendency.

Mind you it doesnt mean I'm strictly observant or abide by all doctrine and dogma in my opinion or my life.

I also would not call protest warrior a Christian scene. They did have a religious section called the 36th chamber I believe. There were some very knowledgeable people there at one point who really influence my perception on some things. Protestantism does lend itself to faith shopping and it's too much to keep up with.
 
That is amazing, considering I was raised in church with many complex rituals and yet had no idea what was going on most of the time.

did you ever find out what was going on or did you just abandon it?
 
Hello guys, This is my first post so please go easy. I read the forum from time to time, just decided to sign up.

Anyways, I don't consider denomination to be important, well it ought not to be. It's like choosing your brand of butter which can be influenced by your family tradition or a new partner, or an advert on the telly. As long as it's still butter, that's great.
That said, I do try to find a church that preaches and teaches the bible, not their tradition or opinion. How do you know? you spend time studying the Bible as well, that's the only way with the help of God to know how to discern truth from half-truths. I currently attend a traditional CofE Anglican church.

Now to the matter of RC, I'm picking this up because I've had a similar conversation recently. There's a fundamental flaw in the foundation of RC that seems to corrupt things within it, one being, arrogance. For the record, I did grow up in a mixed religion family (RC, Islam, Amorc etc) that slowly gave way to pentecostalism, which I ended up rebelling strongly against.

Now this flaw in the RC foundations is the misinterpretation of this verse, which Peter himself picks up later in his letter which should clear any confusion.

Matthew 16:18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.

However if you read the context of the verse, you'd find that Jesus was referring to himself as identified by Peter in 16:16
And the one thing to be known about scripture is that, if one thing is said somewhere, it will be echoed through out the bible.

1 Cor 10:4 ...and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.

The entire Bible refers to Jesus as the Rock, lots of passages in the OT that mention 'Rock of my Salvation'
Peter gives a full break down here: 1 Peter 2:1-10

"As you come to him, the living Stone—rejected by humans but chosen by God and precious to him— you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ."

I do understand that is very hard to break tradition, but the Truth doesn't specify a particular church, we who are in Christ are the church and Christ is the Rock.

"For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ." (1 Cor. 3:11).

Cheers.
 
Back
Top