|
Smoking Crow posted:I see funny cash and immediately think Company scrip
|
# ? Sep 21, 2016 19:29 |
|
|
# ? May 15, 2024 02:53 |
|
HEY GAL posted:the dude's making fun of a left winger because the real cool rad poo poo is being right wing, i would bet it's about welfare It's Chesterton. He hated Usury.
|
# ? Sep 21, 2016 19:35 |
|
That poem is especially disingenuous given that Chesterton constantly gave Oscar Wilde poo poo for being a fun-loving pessimist.
|
# ? Sep 21, 2016 19:40 |
|
Worthleast posted:It's Chesterton. He hated Usury. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._K._Chesterton#Charges_of_anti-Semitism
|
# ? Sep 21, 2016 19:57 |
|
it did mention putting someone in an oven maybe it was a game of thrones reference
|
# ? Sep 21, 2016 20:07 |
|
syscall girl posted:it did mention putting someone in an oven inb4 ezra pound reference
|
# ? Sep 21, 2016 20:10 |
|
Just realised that one guy in my choir has been a member for 75 years, holy crap
|
# ? Sep 21, 2016 20:39 |
|
An old white Christian British man an antisemite? My monocle just broke in shock
|
# ? Sep 21, 2016 20:46 |
|
Chesterton's kind of funny to me because despite having your average Victorian racism he was pretty anti-imperialistic since if it's OK for Englishmen to be hardcore nationalists why can't the Egyptians or Nicaraguans?
|
# ? Sep 21, 2016 20:48 |
|
Tias posted:This is, essentially, why organized christianity isn't for me. Not content to accept my father in the sky as the only godlike intelligence, I also cannot place him above( or below) mother earth. Both things must be, and be equal, for the universe to be in harmony. the first problem here is the assertion that you can give God a defined, logical form with your human abilities. this is not an accurate description of Christian thought. the second problem is that you say God has a ding-dong. eww, gross, don't do that
|
# ? Sep 21, 2016 21:45 |
|
Lutha Mahtin posted:the first problem here is the assertion that you can give God a defined, logical form with your human abilities. this is not an accurate description of Christian thought. the second problem is that you say God has a ding-dong. eww, gross, don't do that I don't think I assert that. I've learned from the body of lore in my particular tradition that these are some of the aspects the father has, not them all or that they are particularly well defined. Well, if you think that's gross, I hope you never learn the symbology of sweat lodges :iamafag: it's a huge uterus, being fertilized by burning rock and there's an altar straight up representing the placenta outside
|
# ? Sep 21, 2016 21:48 |
|
Jesus is recorded as having a dong in his time on earth, and given that he ascended bodily into heaven I'd expect it's still attached. Jesus=God within the whole trinity thing, therefore God has a ding dong. qed
|
# ? Sep 21, 2016 22:01 |
|
Two cool things before I go to bed: All the various vestments of the Pope before the Council (he didn't wear them all at once tho) https://vimeo.com/183328027 (can you even embed vimeo videos?) Some bored public officials in Germany created a 3D image of Luther from his death mask. That smirk at the end
|
# ? Sep 21, 2016 22:06 |
|
HEY GAL posted:the dude's making fun of a left winger because the real cool rad poo poo is being right wing, i would bet it's about welfare Chesterton's pretty solidly against right wing economics, all through his life. Hilariously this seems to slip the attention of all the reactionary Catholics who idolise him nowadays. Not to say he's not a smug oval office with a lot of downright horrible views. Honestly, and I don't mean this in any way as an anti-Catholic statement, but he becomes a whole lot worse of a writer and a person after he swims the Tiber. There's this really unfortunate tendency for right wing English people to find in the Catholic Church only what they looked for. Possibly similar to those reactionary converts to Orthodoxy.
|
# ? Sep 21, 2016 22:26 |
|
Tias posted:I don't think I assert that. I've learned from the body of lore in my particular tradition that these are some of the aspects the father has, not them all or that they are particularly well defined. im usually only half-serious posting
|
# ? Sep 21, 2016 22:49 |
|
Can I suggest an amplification to the OP? You don't have to be a Christian. You do have to be polite.
|
# ? Sep 21, 2016 23:47 |
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:Can I suggest an amplification to the OP? that's the "be a cool guy don't be an unchool guy" clause
|
# ? Sep 21, 2016 23:48 |
|
What if you're too coolastic for scholastics?
|
# ? Sep 22, 2016 01:11 |
|
HEY GAL posted:that's the "be a cool guy don't be an unchool guy" clause I'd be happier if it were a bit more specific, given the number of SA threads whose definition of "cool" might not be the same as this subcommunity's.
|
# ? Sep 22, 2016 01:13 |
|
I'm sick and my brain no work good for talking right now. So here is my favorite song about syncretism. Also the only song I know about syncretism. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdfht6D2y7U
|
# ? Sep 22, 2016 01:51 |
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:I'd be happier if it were a bit more specific, given the number of SA threads whose definition of "cool" might not be the same as this subcommunity's. I only follow God's rules
|
# ? Sep 22, 2016 06:42 |
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:I'd be happier if it were a bit more specific, given the number of SA threads whose definition of "cool" might not be the same as this subcommunity's. thread rules: 1) don't be an rear end in a top hat 2) also let's not talk abortion or call each other heretics 3) non-Christians, ex-Christians and liturgi-curious goons are totally welcome, seriously we're not looking to convert you, this is mostly Christianity shitposting, theology, and silly hats/vestments. e: I am upset that the thread title is now spelled correctly. It does not reflect our fundamentally sinful reality. SIN BOLDLY MU'FUCKAS. Pellisworth fucked around with this message at 14:22 on Sep 22, 2016 |
# ? Sep 22, 2016 14:12 |
|
Pellisworth posted:2) also let's not talk abortion or call each other heretics Schism.
|
# ? Sep 22, 2016 14:25 |
|
Cythereal posted:Schism. You ἀκέφαλος !
|
# ? Sep 22, 2016 14:30 |
|
Cythereal posted:Schism. if ur so mad mayb u should start another thread punk
|
# ? Sep 22, 2016 14:36 |
|
Pellisworth posted:if ur so mad mayb u should start another thread punk I very well might. With blue carpets instead of salmon, and getting the after-service donuts from Dunkin Donuts, not the grocery store. Not that I'd ever expect an outmoded traditionalist like you to understand.
|
# ? Sep 22, 2016 14:56 |
|
I like Pellisworth's list a lot. I do think an explicit "Don't talk about
|
# ? Sep 22, 2016 15:15 |
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:I like Pellisworth's list a lot. I do think an explicit "Don't talk about If someone asks why a certain denomination views abortions in a particular way, there's no reason not to answer. I think we even had a civilised abortion-related discussion in the previous thread, too.
|
# ? Sep 22, 2016 15:46 |
|
It's really really easy for that in particular to blow up into people getting really angry so we tend to avoid it.
|
# ? Sep 22, 2016 16:00 |
|
"What is the official position of church x on abortion?" is a fine question if someone is genuinely curious. "Here's why church x's position is dumb and bad," is going to go to poo poo real fast.
|
# ? Sep 22, 2016 16:25 |
|
we probably have many different opinions (like, i know for a fact zonohedron and i do because i read her posts on the topic), and unlike our opinions on a whole bunch of other stuff, we will probably get emotional about them if it comes to an argument and say things we'll regret
|
# ? Sep 22, 2016 16:32 |
|
Pellisworth posted:It does not reflect our fundamentally sinful reality.
|
# ? Sep 22, 2016 16:36 |
|
I still like Godwinopoulos's Law, from r/OrthodoxChristianity:quote:Defintion: During an internet Orthodox argument, the first person to suggest that another go to confession automatically loses. It will also get your comment removed.
|
# ? Sep 22, 2016 17:12 |
|
We may have different opinions on things, but one constant remains: the love of cool religious hats e: that picture's wrong on one account though: members of orders who have a white habit can wear a matching zucchetto too, I'm pretty sure System Metternich fucked around with this message at 17:33 on Sep 22, 2016 |
# ? Sep 22, 2016 17:30 |
|
System Metternich posted:We may have different opinions on things, but one constant remains: the love of cool religious hats Evangelicals don't wear religious hats. Checkmate, liturgical.
|
# ? Sep 22, 2016 17:37 |
|
Cythereal posted:Evangelicals don't wear religious hats. Checkmate, liturgical.
|
# ? Sep 22, 2016 17:47 |
|
So would Eastern Orthodox recognize the baptism of a protestant? If they're wrong about its legitimacy, and the baptism was legitimate (say, through the holy spirit) would a second baptism have some negative consequences?
|
# ? Sep 22, 2016 17:48 |
|
I know Catholics accept Protestant baptism as long as it's Trinitarian (ie in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, not just in the name of Jesus), and if there's dispute of whether or not it counted they get a conditional baptism.
|
# ? Sep 22, 2016 17:53 |
|
Orthodox Wiki posted:The Orthodox Church makes no judgment concerning the efficacy or validity of baptisms performed by other denominations, as regards people who are members of those respective denominations. The precise status and significance of such baptisms has not been revealed by God to the Orthodox Church; however, as a practical matter, they are treated as non-efficacious unless and until the person joins the Orthodox Church. Persons coming to Orthodoxy from other denominations, and who had been baptized with water in the name of the Trinity, are generally not received by holy baptism, but instead through holy chrismation, after which their former baptism is deemed to be efficacious. The final decision as to the mode of reception to be used in each case rests with the bishop. When there is doubt as to whether or how the person was previously baptized, a conditional baptism is employed, in which the officiant says something of the form of "if you are not yet baptized, I baptize you..." The need for conditional baptisms is motivated not only by factual uncertainties regarding the original baptism, but also by the uncertainty of some of the baptismal theology regarding the precise conditions for the validity of baptism. (The Church holds that one cannot be certain that opinions which are offered by pious theologians, but on which the Church has not made an authoritative pronouncement, are correct, and even authoritative pronouncements can have multiple interpretations which the Church has neither definitively endorsed or rejected.)
|
# ? Sep 22, 2016 17:57 |
|
|
# ? May 15, 2024 02:53 |
|
our official position on a thing is almost always literally ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
|
# ? Sep 22, 2016 18:03 |