Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 41 to 54 of 54

Thread: The Idea of Religion

  1. #41
    Post-Post-Truth Coeruleum Blue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Höheres und Höchstes
    Posts
    4,351
    Mentioned
    87 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    In Jewish tradition, Satan was actually the loyal servant of God who played the devil's advocate (which has a somewhat different meaning in popular culture now of course - tending to mean a defence of the devil, rather than scrutinising God): who made sure God was fair and faithful to its people.
    This is a wrong definition of devil's advocate. The devil's advocate comes from the process of canonization of saints, where one person would advocate they were a saint and went to Heaven and the other would advocate they weren't and went to Hell (the devil's advocate.)
    HAMLET I will speak to this fellow.—
    Whose grave’s this, sirrah?

    GRAVEDIGGER Mine, sir.
    O, a pit of clay for to be made
    For such a guest is meet.

    HAMLET I think it be thine indeed, for thou liest in ’t.

    GRAVEDIGGER You lie out on ’t, sir, and therefore ’tis
    not yours. For my part, I do not lie in ’t, yet it is
    mine.

    HAMLET Thou dost lie in ’t, to be in ’t and say it is thine.
    ’Tis for the dead, not for the quick; therefore thou
    liest.

    GRAVEDIGGER ’Tis a quick lie, sir; ’twill away again
    from me to you.

    HAMLET What man dost thou dig it for?

    GRAVEDIGGER For no man, sir.

    HAMLET What woman then?

    GRAVEDIGGER For none, neither.

    HAMLET Who is to be buried in ’t?

    GRAVEDIGGER One that was a woman, sir, but, rest
    her soul, she’s dead.



  2. #42
    Enlightened Hedonist
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    18,354
    Mentioned
    441 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coeruleum Blue View Post
    This is a wrong definition of devil's advocate. The devil's advocate comes from the process of canonization of saints, where one person would advocate they were a saint and went to Heaven and the other would advocate they weren't and went to Hell (the devil's advocate.)
    Maybe that's true of "devil's advocate", but Jewish texts often regarded Satan as an agent of God.

    The Book of Job is essentially the central and primary text regarding Satan, and it's where God asks Satan about his opinion on Job's piety, then gives Satan permission to torment Job! (eventually killing all of Job's family - the "only" people Satan kills in the whole Bible, and with God's permission!).

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_o..._and_in_Heaven

  3. #43
    Enlightened Hedonist
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    18,354
    Mentioned
    441 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    The Gospels have Jesus being out in the wilderness for forty days with just himself and Satan, and yet the Gospels are supposed to be eyewitness accounts!

    In truth, the 40 was allegorically significant because the Exodus was said to be 40 years, and the "Satan" figure was used intended to show that Jesus was worthy or perhaps more than human.

  4. #44
    Post-Post-Truth Coeruleum Blue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Höheres und Höchstes
    Posts
    4,351
    Mentioned
    87 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    The Gospels have Jesus being out in the wilderness for forty days with just himself and Satan, and yet the Gospels are supposed to be eyewitness accounts!

    In truth, the 40 was allegorically significant because the Exodus was said to be 40 years, and the "Satan" figure was used intended to show that Jesus was worthy or perhaps more than human.
    Weren't the disciples of Jesus supposed to have miraculous powers? That might include clairvoyance since Jesus himself purportedly was explicitly telepathic, or that might fall under the banner of prophecy even though I think prophecy is supposed to be more truths about God than just things like knowing something that happened somewhere, tongues is also considered separate.

    There just might not be anything that can be said that can make religious texts seem completely incoherent.
    HAMLET I will speak to this fellow.—
    Whose grave’s this, sirrah?

    GRAVEDIGGER Mine, sir.
    O, a pit of clay for to be made
    For such a guest is meet.

    HAMLET I think it be thine indeed, for thou liest in ’t.

    GRAVEDIGGER You lie out on ’t, sir, and therefore ’tis
    not yours. For my part, I do not lie in ’t, yet it is
    mine.

    HAMLET Thou dost lie in ’t, to be in ’t and say it is thine.
    ’Tis for the dead, not for the quick; therefore thou
    liest.

    GRAVEDIGGER ’Tis a quick lie, sir; ’twill away again
    from me to you.

    HAMLET What man dost thou dig it for?

    GRAVEDIGGER For no man, sir.

    HAMLET What woman then?

    GRAVEDIGGER For none, neither.

    HAMLET Who is to be buried in ’t?

    GRAVEDIGGER One that was a woman, sir, but, rest
    her soul, she’s dead.



  5. #45
    Enlightened Hedonist
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    18,354
    Mentioned
    441 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coeruleum Blue View Post
    Weren't the disciples of Jesus supposed to have miraculous powers? That might include clairvoyance since Jesus himself purportedly was explicitly telepathic, or that might fall under the banner of prophecy even though I think prophecy is supposed to be more truths about God than just things like knowing something that happened somewhere, tongues is also considered separate.

    There just might not be anything that can be said that can make religious texts seem completely incoherent.
    Stuff like being able to handle poisonous snakes without risk and that sort of thing, according to the Gospels.

  6. #46
    Post-Post-Truth Coeruleum Blue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Höheres und Höchstes
    Posts
    4,351
    Mentioned
    87 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    Stuff like being able to handle poisonous snakes without risk and that sort of thing, according to the Gospels.
    A lot more than that. 1 Corinthians 13.
    HAMLET I will speak to this fellow.—
    Whose grave’s this, sirrah?

    GRAVEDIGGER Mine, sir.
    O, a pit of clay for to be made
    For such a guest is meet.

    HAMLET I think it be thine indeed, for thou liest in ’t.

    GRAVEDIGGER You lie out on ’t, sir, and therefore ’tis
    not yours. For my part, I do not lie in ’t, yet it is
    mine.

    HAMLET Thou dost lie in ’t, to be in ’t and say it is thine.
    ’Tis for the dead, not for the quick; therefore thou
    liest.

    GRAVEDIGGER ’Tis a quick lie, sir; ’twill away again
    from me to you.

    HAMLET What man dost thou dig it for?

    GRAVEDIGGER For no man, sir.

    HAMLET What woman then?

    GRAVEDIGGER For none, neither.

    HAMLET Who is to be buried in ’t?

    GRAVEDIGGER One that was a woman, sir, but, rest
    her soul, she’s dead.



  7. #47
    End's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    TIM
    ILI-Ni sp/sx
    Posts
    1,669
    Mentioned
    275 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    I find religious people don't have a coherent complete description of "God", other than being for example a creator and/or paternal figure. The Christians if they depict their God basically draw theirs like the Romans drew Jupiter/Zeus (or Jesus after Mercury/Apollo or Cesare Borgia), or they don't draw it at all due to iconoclasm and/or not having any idea about what "God" is.

    Sometimes I feel bad for asking questions to religious people, even if they should be straightforward to answer. As Jon Stewart said: “Religion - It's given people hope in a world torn apart by religion.”
    Errr, I actually do. Also, it's no mistake that the pagans were on the "right track" as it were. The like of Socrates and Aristotle deduced that "Monotheism" was the truth. Pagan men living in pagan societies and yet without any exposure to Jews far as I can recall they came about that conclusion independently.

    I'd also challenge Mr. Stewart to seriously ask himself if Governments did more damage than religion did. Democide is a thing and, much like the sexual abuse done to students both male and female within the public school system, is a consideration conveniently overlooked by the obvious suspects. If you thought the Catholic Chruch was bad boy oh boy let me point you in the direction of the secular priesthood. Makes my side of things look downright saintly (pardon the pun).

    People don't want to have their own personal narratives challenged. I do, but that's only because I'm so absolutely certain I'm right I have the gall, the absolute gall, to let my most ardent of enemies continue to spew forth their blasphemies and slanders. Let them. I'll let you. I, unlike so many others who claim to believe as I do, have the full faith of my convictions...

  8. #48
    Enlightened Hedonist
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    18,354
    Mentioned
    441 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by End View Post
    Errr, I actually do. Also, it's no mistake that the pagans were on the "right track" as it were. The like of Socrates and Aristotle deduced that "Monotheism" was the truth. Pagan men living in pagan societies and yet without any exposure to Jews far as I can recall they came about that conclusion independently.

    I'd also challenge Mr. Stewart to seriously ask himself if Governments did more damage than religion did. Democide is a thing and, much like the sexual abuse done to students both male and female within the public school system, is a consideration conveniently overlooked by the obvious suspects. If you thought the Catholic Chruch was bad boy oh boy let me point you in the direction of the secular priesthood. Makes my side of things look downright saintly (pardon the pun).

    People don't want to have their own personal narratives challenged. I do, but that's only because I'm so absolutely certain I'm right I have the gall, the absolute gall, to let my most ardent of enemies continue to spew forth their blasphemies and slanders. Let them. I'll let you. I, unlike so many others who claim to believe as I do, have the full faith of my convictions...
    Can you give a list of properties unique to "God" that are observable?

  9. #49
    Post-Post-Truth Coeruleum Blue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Höheres und Höchstes
    Posts
    4,351
    Mentioned
    87 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by End View Post
    Errr, I actually do. Also, it's no mistake that the pagans were on the "right track" as it were. The like of Socrates and Aristotle deduced that "Monotheism" was the truth. Pagan men living in pagan societies and yet without any exposure to Jews far as I can recall they came about that conclusion independently.
    Subteigh himself has brought that up before. I have also brought that up in a different context which was ignored.

    Quote Originally Posted by End View Post
    I'd also challenge Mr. Stewart to seriously ask himself if Governments did more damage than religion did. Democide is a thing and, much like the sexual abuse done to students both male and female within the public school system, is a consideration conveniently overlooked by the obvious suspects. If you thought the Catholic Chruch was bad boy oh boy let me point you in the direction of the secular priesthood. Makes my side of things look downright saintly (pardon the pun).
    Or maybe, having a job position where men are not allowed to marry, shut in closed spaces with each other for long periods of time, and have unlimited access to altar boys attracts men who sexually desire that kind of atmosphere because they have no interest in women? Granted, that itself is not proof God could not have wanted to establish something like that. Sometimes things just have inevitable consequences. However, I think that's a counterargument against it, because the Eastern Orthodox Church's priests seem to be doing fine, and I have no idea why God would say "No marriage, now here's a bunch of men and prepubescent boys but they're not your replacement for marriage either." It seems like a political decision made to try to keep money within the Roman Catholic Church by trying to deny heirs to priests, and as we all know, the love of money is the root of all evil.

    Quote Originally Posted by End View Post
    People don't want to have their own personal narratives challenged. I do, but that's only because I'm so absolutely certain I'm right I have the gall, the absolute gall, to let my most ardent of enemies continue to spew forth their blasphemies and slanders. Let them. I'll let you. I, unlike so many others who claim to believe as I do, have the full faith of my convictions...
    You only want to have your personal narratives challenged by people like Subteigh who you're confident won't do anything to change them. You ignore people like me who actually challenge them. And I'm not even looking to change your mind. I'm not looking to change my mind. I am not looking for any particular outcome as long as the outcome is the Truth. Any preconceptions I have are an obstacle I avoid. I am not here for identity politics, because it is best not to think of yourself at all.
    HAMLET I will speak to this fellow.—
    Whose grave’s this, sirrah?

    GRAVEDIGGER Mine, sir.
    O, a pit of clay for to be made
    For such a guest is meet.

    HAMLET I think it be thine indeed, for thou liest in ’t.

    GRAVEDIGGER You lie out on ’t, sir, and therefore ’tis
    not yours. For my part, I do not lie in ’t, yet it is
    mine.

    HAMLET Thou dost lie in ’t, to be in ’t and say it is thine.
    ’Tis for the dead, not for the quick; therefore thou
    liest.

    GRAVEDIGGER ’Tis a quick lie, sir; ’twill away again
    from me to you.

    HAMLET What man dost thou dig it for?

    GRAVEDIGGER For no man, sir.

    HAMLET What woman then?

    GRAVEDIGGER For none, neither.

    HAMLET Who is to be buried in ’t?

    GRAVEDIGGER One that was a woman, sir, but, rest
    her soul, she’s dead.



  10. #50
    End's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    TIM
    ILI-Ni sp/sx
    Posts
    1,669
    Mentioned
    275 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coeruleum Blue View Post
    Or maybe, having a job position where men are not allowed to marry, shut in closed spaces with each other for long periods of time, and have unlimited access to altar boys attracts men who sexually desire that kind of atmosphere because they have no interest in women? Granted, that itself is not proof God could not have wanted to establish something like that. Sometimes things just have inevitable consequences. However, I think that's a counterargument against it, because the Eastern Orthodox Church's priests seem to be doing fine, and I have no idea why God would say "No marriage, now here's a bunch of men and prepubescent boys but they're not your replacement for marriage either." It seems like a political decision made to try to keep money within the Roman Catholic Church by trying to deny heirs to priests, and as we all know, the love of money is the root of all evil.
    Oh my, seems I've struck a major nerve. I'll lay this one out for you in terms you can probably understand. See, the thing that you value more than your freedom is the tool that will be used to enslave you by the Great Enemy.

    This is sadly a thing that the PTB/Totalitarian Assholes have figured out. Turns out people are more than willing to die for a given cause themselves, but they ain't so keen on sacrificing their entire extended/blood-related family whilst they live on to see the success of their ventures if ya catch my meaning. I mean hell this shit is even dealt with by Kirkegaard. Abraham's "Leap of Faith" involved sacrificing his only son that he ought not to have been given by the standards of his time in the first place. Plus, well, human sacrifice was just a thing you did in those times. Baal wasn't quite satisfied by a mere young and likely tasty if you grilled it right goat.

    To bring this home. How could/would the devil wish to introduce error and heresy into the flock of the faithful? Why, by their collectively trusted and beloved "priest" of course. How could the great enemy best get him/her to tell them all a suite of lies and errors? If he has, say, a wife and family and he gets a memo that says hey, that's and wonderfully happy family ya got there. It'd be a shame if something happened to it. Right? Well, something will happen to it if you don't, let's start light, phrase your next homily to subtly suggest that Arius might have had a point. Surely, there's a bit of wiggle room in regards to the full Divinity and Humanity of Christ eh?

    Not sure if you understand how Catholic Churches work but when we collectively call the priest "father" we're rather earnest and serious about assigning him that title. To scale it up to its maximum the "pope" is literally the father of billions despite the fact he hasn't spawned a single baby if we assume he's stuck to his vows of chastity from the moment he received his Holy Orders.

    Not to say that popes haven't been monumentally fucked up nor that a pope can compel the faithful to error. This is where the "trad" Catholics fuck up bigtime. Not even Francis has violated the institution by actually invoking infallibility in regards to an error. Did he fuck up? Yeah he did. Did he actually, in point of fact, compel the faithful to embrace sin/error? No. (fun case: how he handled the recent overturn of Roe v. Wade. Pure Catholic if nothing else).

    Also I'd challenge you to look up what Altar Boys/Girls are and how they function. They ain't exactly on the priest's "beck and call" as it were...

  11. #51
    Post-Post-Truth Coeruleum Blue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Höheres und Höchstes
    Posts
    4,351
    Mentioned
    87 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by End View Post
    Oh my, seems I've struck a major nerve. I'll lay this one out for you in terms you can probably understand. See, the thing that you value more than your freedom is the tool that will be used to enslave you by the Great Enemy.

    This is sadly a thing that the PTB/Totalitarian Assholes have figured out. Turns out people are more than willing to die for a given cause themselves, but they ain't so keen on sacrificing their entire extended/blood-related family whilst they live on to see the success of their ventures if ya catch my meaning. I mean hell this shit is even dealt with by Kirkegaard. Abraham's "Leap of Faith" involved sacrificing his only son that he ought not to have been given by the standards of his time in the first place. Plus, well, human sacrifice was just a thing you did in those times. Baal wasn't quite satisfied by a mere young and likely tasty if you grilled it right goat.

    To bring this home. How could/would the devil wish to introduce error and heresy into the flock of the faithful? Why, by their collectively trusted and beloved "priest" of course. How could the great enemy best get him/her to tell them all a suite of lies and errors? If he has, say, a wife and family and he gets a memo that says hey, that's and wonderfully happy family ya got there. It'd be a shame if something happened to it. Right? Well, something will happen to it if you don't, let's start light, phrase your next homily to subtly suggest that Arius might have had a point. Surely, there's a bit of wiggle room in regards to the full Divinity and Humanity of Christ eh?

    Not sure if you understand how Catholic Churches work but when we collectively call the priest "father" we're rather earnest and serious about assigning him that title. To scale it up to its maximum the "pope" is literally the father of billions despite the fact he hasn't spawned a single baby if we assume he's stuck to his vows of chastity from the moment he received his Holy Orders.

    Not to say that popes haven't been monumentally fucked up nor that a pope can compel the faithful to error. This is where the "trad" Catholics fuck up bigtime. Not even Francis has violated the institution by actually invoking infallibility in regards to an error. Did he fuck up? Yeah he did. Did he actually, in point of fact, compel the faithful to embrace sin/error? No. (fun case: how he handled the recent overturn of Roe v. Wade. Pure Catholic if nothing else).

    Also I'd challenge you to look up what Altar Boys/Girls are and how they function. They ain't exactly on the priest's "beck and call" as it were...
    The only freedom you have is the freedom God gives you. If you are free to follow God you are not free to sin and vice versa, and nothing can be other than as God wills it. So your first point sounds completely rhetorical and almost sophistic to me.

    Now, please explain how the results of this would be any different than if Catholic priests were just not allowed to marry in order to keep money in the Roman Catholic Church. If something cannot be understood, to me, it might as well be a deception. So I will not believe anything that cannot be explained to me. If you could explain things like the trinity and running around with incense and self-flagellating monks as somehow being logically necessary, that would be enough for me to accept them even if part of the practice cannot be understood, because after all, people's understanding is at least limited by the amount of time and effort they can put into things. But as of now you have not explained Catholicism as anything other than Western tradition. I've heard "anime Catholicism" is a thing, do you just like the depiction of Catholicism in media like anime? Of course that wouldn't make it wrong, but it doesn't make it right, either.

    I just see no good arguments at all for Catholicism and you still have not made any other than "Western civilization" which I think is really a counterargument, since Western civilization in the heights of Catholicism seems like the most backwards, pagan, superstitious people in the world to me, the people who were locking up Copernicus and Galileo and promoting all sorts of sins like gambling, drunken revelries, and prostitution in the name of "the lesser evil." I don't see it as Catholicism vs. popular culture such as Oprah and TikTok, I still see them as essentially being on the same side. I have no intent or desire whatsoever for the evil one, he is my enemy, so if you have any information that Catholicism is definitely true and not just something you like the aesthetics of I would like to have it. (I don't even like the aesthetics of Catholicism, it also just looks pagan to me, but that might be an incorrect predisposition I have.)
    HAMLET I will speak to this fellow.—
    Whose grave’s this, sirrah?

    GRAVEDIGGER Mine, sir.
    O, a pit of clay for to be made
    For such a guest is meet.

    HAMLET I think it be thine indeed, for thou liest in ’t.

    GRAVEDIGGER You lie out on ’t, sir, and therefore ’tis
    not yours. For my part, I do not lie in ’t, yet it is
    mine.

    HAMLET Thou dost lie in ’t, to be in ’t and say it is thine.
    ’Tis for the dead, not for the quick; therefore thou
    liest.

    GRAVEDIGGER ’Tis a quick lie, sir; ’twill away again
    from me to you.

    HAMLET What man dost thou dig it for?

    GRAVEDIGGER For no man, sir.

    HAMLET What woman then?

    GRAVEDIGGER For none, neither.

    HAMLET Who is to be buried in ’t?

    GRAVEDIGGER One that was a woman, sir, but, rest
    her soul, she’s dead.



  12. #52
    Enlightened Hedonist
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    18,354
    Mentioned
    441 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by End View Post
    Errr, I actually do. Also, it's no mistake that the pagans were on the "right track" as it were. The like of Socrates and Aristotle deduced that "Monotheism" was the truth. Pagan men living in pagan societies and yet without any exposure to Jews far as I can recall they came about that conclusion independently.

    I'd also challenge Mr. Stewart to seriously ask himself if Governments did more damage than religion did. Democide is a thing and, much like the sexual abuse done to students both male and female within the public school system, is a consideration conveniently overlooked by the obvious suspects. If you thought the Catholic Chruch was bad boy oh boy let me point you in the direction of the secular priesthood. Makes my side of things look downright saintly (pardon the pun).

    People don't want to have their own personal narratives challenged. I do, but that's only because I'm so absolutely certain I'm right I have the gall, the absolute gall, to let my most ardent of enemies continue to spew forth their blasphemies and slanders. Let them. I'll let you. I, unlike so many others who claim to believe as I do, have the full faith of my convictions...
    Can you give a list of properties unique to "God" that are observable?
    ONE property, then?

  13. #53
    Shazaam's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Lamp
    TIM
    AB-IEI-Ni
    Posts
    13,776
    Mentioned
    594 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Religion is a tool designed to keep people away from God since ppl just use it for power or to abuse others. The real God is found via a spiritual experience after you go through something called the Dark Night of the Soul - and realize the Oneness behind your ego. But it is an experience to be felt and lived. You trade all your vices and addictions for an equanimity blueprint. If you were too arrogant, you are humbled - if you are too humbled, you are made more self-confident - if you are too straight you are made gay, and if you are too gay you are made even gayer. Everything in moderation especially moderation.

    Things like sexual addictions happen when a person needs to experience something even higher to get the high. But then pretty soon they need to cross legal boundaries too much to achieve those things and the next thing you know they're in jail or prison while an umbridge type person smiles sinisterly at them. "We've got the perpetrator" even though they are probably the worst perpetrator of them all. That isn't to say the person shouldn't have gotten arrested though.

    Things like real spirituality and truly accepting God makes it be where cheesy models in Sears underwear catalogue is enough to get you off again. An Umbridge will still try to make this illegal though (or other benevolent things that aren't really a problem), because well obviously they're just cunts who are the farthest away from God as possible. Sex and power naturally pushes the envelope no matter if it's "good" or "evil", but with God what is needed to push the envelope isn't so extreme anymore.

    The ego conceptualizes the Oneness as something downright boring or like "equality doesn't exist" even though Oneness isn't really the same thing as equality or being bored or any of those things. Oneness is far from boring. Oneness is Funness.

    A lot of people have crippling social anxiety where they have a hard time even going into a store for fear of being judged or they just lack so much self confidence. True spirituality helps them realize there's nothing to be afraid of- to just approach life, even if there's a shooter in the Wal-Mart because our lives are going to end anyway. The shooter is a part of them anyway. The Umbridge is a part of me too as I'm moderator here even though I despise real life Umbridges- it's hypocritical but it's also Holy-Critical Hit Damage. in Jesus Christ I gay, gaymen.

    Well I know I have the tools for real spirituality - but I mean it's so much easier to fool people than it is to convince them being fooled, or to bring them about in Oneness since it's something each individual must go through but as a real life lvl 75 Cleric, I'm going to try.
    Last edited by Shazaam; 08-28-2022 at 12:37 AM.

  14. #54
    Serious Left-Static Negativist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    3,527
    Mentioned
    361 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coeruleum Blue View Post
    This is a wrong definition of devil's advocate. The devil's advocate comes from the process of canonization of saints, where one person would advocate they were a saint and went to Heaven and the other would advocate they weren't and went to Hell (the devil's advocate.)
    *Constructive*

    [My response button still isn't working after all this time]
    "A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
    ........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........


    "Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
    by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
    attitude acceptable to today's standards."
    - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"

    .
    .
    .


Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •