Spirituality

Spirituality

  1. Standard memberDeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    Cosmopolis
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    82767
    15 Jan '20 01:47
    @ghost-of-a-duke said
    Universalists believe it impossible that a loving God would elect only a portion of mankind to salvation and doom the rest to eternal punishment. They insisted that punishment in the afterlife was for a limited period during which the soul was purified and prepared for eternity in the presence of God.

    (Wiki)
    The old Catholic notion of purgatory.
  2. Subscriberdivegeester
    true democrat
    Geneva
    Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    92280
    15 Jan '20 06:39
    @deepthought said
    The old Catholic notion of purgatory.
    I think it’s still a current notion.
  3. SubscriberFMF
    Main Poster
    This Thread
    Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    29949
    15 Jan '20 06:53
    @divegeester said
    I think it’s still a current notion.
    I am a sociological Catholic so my purgatory is purely sociological.
  4. SubscriberGhost of a Duke
    A Strutting Misfit
    in London
    Joined
    14 Mar '15
    Moves
    15663
    15 Jan '20 08:13
    @kellyjay said
    And?
    Sharing a different perspective kelly. Is that permissible?
  5. SubscriberFMF
    Main Poster
    This Thread
    Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    29949
    15 Jan '20 08:483 edits
    @ghost-of-a-duke said
    Sharing a different perspective kelly. Is that permissible?
    Sharing a different perspective, apparently, is...

    [1] evidence of "the devil's hands hard at work making a lie of the truth"

    [2] NOT "founded solidly in the truth" (if the perspective is different from KellyJay's

    [3] sowing confusion and division

    [4] probably blasphemous

    [5] simply re-juxtapositioning words, their meanings and intent to arrive at a convoluted meaning not consistent with the truth or context in which they're found for the apparent purpose of furthering your agenda which is to derail coherent, meaningful and purposeful discourse, as well as stroking your sense of intellectual superiority

    [6] to go overboard by introducing into the narrative of any given discussion your psycho-babbling and hyperbolical insertions of language not inclusive with a coherent train of thought consistent with the content and context of the topic of discussion

    [7] kind of like seeing oneself as a god or like a person that struts in, but first pauses to look at their self in a mirror vainly seeing their self as what they wish they were but knowing they're not

    [8] an indication that you are a man delirious with himself because he has a disproportionate sense of the importance of his own thoughts, ideas and the noise he makes

    [9] almost certainly mistaken
  6. Standard memberKellyJayonline
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    151959
    15 Jan '20 10:54
    @ghost-of-a-duke said
    Sharing a different perspective kelly. Is that permissible?
    Why sure
  7. Subscriberdivegeester
    true democrat
    Geneva
    Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    92280
    15 Jan '20 14:48
    @fmf said
    I am a sociological Catholic so my purgatory is purely sociological.
    If one combines the words sociological and catholic and leaves out a few letters one can pretty much come up with "sociopathic".

    Just musing.
  8. Standard memberKellyJayonline
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    151959
    16 Jan '20 10:22
    @ghost-of-a-duke said
    Sharing a different perspective kelly. Is that permissible?
    Just one thing, as you look at when we sin, you believe only those that are against one another matter? Those sins against God are meaningless? Your perspective is that God isn't alive and real, so all such sins are, in your opinion, permissible only because without God, they are meaningless? Your perspective, you seem to be rendering, is solely based on your belief that God isn’t real.

    Would this change if God is real, holy, just, and sovereign over all of creation? Would it then matter how we treat God in word and deed, since then the offended party is God, making this not victimless.
  9. Standard memberDeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    Cosmopolis
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    82767
    16 Jan '20 10:24
    @divegeester said
    I think it’s still a current notion.
    I was under the impression they'd abolished it.
  10. SubscriberGhost of a Duke
    A Strutting Misfit
    in London
    Joined
    14 Mar '15
    Moves
    15663
    16 Jan '20 13:08
    @kellyjay said
    Just one thing, as you look at when we sin, you believe only those that are against one another matter? Those sins against God are meaningless? Your perspective is that God isn't alive and real, so all such sins are, in your opinion, permissible only because without God, they are meaningless? Your perspective, you seem to be rendering, is solely based on your belief that God ...[text shortened]... how we treat God in word and deed, since then the offended party is God, making this not victimless.
    There is no God, ergo, there is no such thing as 'sin' as understood in a religious context. There are only actions that have been deemed by man as immoral.
  11. Standard memberKellyJayonline
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    151959
    16 Jan '20 13:20
    @ghost-of-a-duke said
    There is no God, ergo, there is no such thing as 'sin' as understood in a religious context. There are only actions that have been deemed by man as immoral.
    So you say, and if you turn out to be fallible, and you are in error?
  12. SubscriberFMF
    Main Poster
    This Thread
    Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    29949
    16 Jan '20 13:33
    @kellyjay said
    So you say, and if you turn out to be fallible, and you are in error?
    Aren't you fallible too?
  13. SubscriberGhost of a Duke
    A Strutting Misfit
    in London
    Joined
    14 Mar '15
    Moves
    15663
    16 Jan '20 16:00
    @kellyjay said
    So you say, and if you turn out to be fallible, and you are in error?
    Right back at you dude.
  14. Standard memberKellyJayonline
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    151959
    16 Jan '20 18:04
    @ghost-of-a-duke said
    Right back at you dude.
    I agree, and when I inquired about if you are wrong, you didn't respond with what that would mean concerning your answer.
  15. SubscriberGhost of a Duke
    A Strutting Misfit
    in London
    Joined
    14 Mar '15
    Moves
    15663
    16 Jan '20 18:17
    @kellyjay said
    I agree, and when I inquired about if you are wrong, you didn't respond with what that would mean concerning your answer.
    I am certain that I am 99.999999% right.

    Should I modify my beliefs and air on the side of caution due to the remote possibility that I am wrong?
Back to Top