[ All ] [ b / boo / int / reap / s / vr ] [ Home / Rules / FAQ / Friends / Legal ] [ Twitter ] [ Manage ]

/boo/ - Supernatural and Religion

Let's get spooky!
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Verification
File
:
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

Welcome, mumkey visitors!

File: 1574619280217.png (7.27 KB, 191x263, 191:263, index.png)

 No.30

Any of you guys religious? What would you call yourself?

I'm Catholic but really enjoy reading up on spirituality and particularly Crowley. Thelema and Golden Dawn are just super fascinating to me.

 No.33

>>30
i was raised catholic but i've been exploring other religions recently
still not sure which one is right for me

 No.34

>>33
Why're you exploring others?

 No.35

I'm leaning on a personal interpretation of daoism
it's really pleasant because it doesn't impose its own strict morality
instead you're sort of forced to deduce the morality on your own from the more fundamental concepts it gives you
and also it has enough freedom and flexibility to be incorporated into a scientific mindset

 No.50

>>30
I'm Protestant
>>33
>>35
I don't understand the concept of cherry picking your religion. People who do that always seems to be a die-hard bugman.
From what I understand if you are flexible enough to believe in a religion just because that one seems to fit you, it's not really faith.

 No.51

>>50
tfw Catholic and my gf's protestant parents are and I quote "hoping I get out of that cult" kek

 No.52

>>51
Kek. My family by part of my dad is catholic, my dad even had interest in being a priest when he was young, I'm protestant because my mother is protestant and my dad didn't mind anymore.
I don't believe it really maters what denomination you are, at the end of the day we still worship the same guy.

 No.53


 No.54

>>50
I don't understand why you assume my religion was cherrypicked like it was no big deal
The concepts gradually grew on me after a long time of drudging through the shitfest that was my life and looking for solutions
Just conjuring up some imaginary type of person in your mind and basing the rest of your post on that image doesn't particularly make for interesting conversation anon

 No.55

>>54
What I mean by cherrypicked and bugman is that some people go around, read a Wikipedia page about a certain religion who they were never in contact, and call it their religion. I've done this when I was a kid with Buddhism, I thought it was cool, read some pages about it and then told my mom I wanted to be a Buddhist, just because it seemed cool. When I said bugman I didn't meant to say that you are a bugman, but rather to say that the majority of the people who convert to other religion do it because of attention seeking, and that person it's called a bugman, he does not care about the religion but rather to what the religion makes him be or not be. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that a believer of Daoism in china would have the same thinking of people who convert from Daoism to Christianity than I have of people who convert from Christianity to Daoism.
>The concepts gradually grew on me after a long time of drudging through the shitfest that was my life and looking for solutions
I don't know how that worked or anything. Not gonna call you any names, the life is yours you decide what you do.

 No.56

>Just conjuring up some imaginary type of person in your mind and basing the rest of your post on that image doesn't particularly make for interesting conversation anon
I ask that you forgive me if that seemed inappropriate, but I think that the "imaginary type of person" is a very real category in today's world. My main point is that people who base the religion on themselves rather than the the opposite don't really have faith.
I also don't mean to be a child who thinks he completely right about everything, this post is not written in no way with an angrily intention towards you, I honestly wish you the best, if you disagree with my point I'm open to a conversation.

 No.57

>>55
>>56
Ah well listen lad it doesn't really matter to me whether those kinds of people exist or not lole. If you're gonna start steering the topic into talking about people that do shit superficially just because it's cool, then you're steering the conversation away from talking about the actual religion and you're pretty much derailing what could otherwise be an interesting thread. Bottom line is all people do stupid shit at some point especially as kids. Considering you're pretty much flinging hypotheticals my way based on presumptions that have absolutely no bearing on my life I'm afraid there isn't much of a conversation for us to have

 No.59

I hope you realize most people are actually https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moralistic_therapeutic_deism regardless of what they claim their religious affiliation to be.

 No.60

>>57
Sure dude whatever. Maybe you are right.
>>59
Most people have a generalized and superficial understanding of religion, I agree.

 No.61

>>59
With regards to this phenomenon amongst Catholics, Michael Voris refers to these kinds of Catholics as members of "The Church of Nice".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTEqSXgJpxY
He complains about the impact their passiveness has had on the Church repeatedly although even before him, there was the term "Cafeteria Catholicism" which referred to people just picking and choosing what beliefs out of Church doctrine that they'll believe.

 No.62

>>61
I don't understand, what is the actual point of that video? There's like zero talk about actual religion itself it's all just some dramafuel about a random group of people not getting along in a convention?

 No.63

>>62
Oh, sorry. I haven't watched every Church Militant video but when I saw the thumbnail, I presumed it was going to be Mr. Voris talking about the ills of the "Church of Nice". Instead, it was just him talking about how he wasn't allowed into the venue. I'd really like to apologise for sucking up your time like that.
I've actually watched 3 minutes of this particular video so here's really what I should've posted. I didn't want to post it though because it was older and doesn't have his modern, cleaner style.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3J7O4eS_ME
In any case, yes, Michael Voris has noted the "MTD" phenomenon amongst Catholics and given it his own name.

 No.64

>>63
lol yeah ok nevermind after like a few minutes in this video seems pretty much the exact same as the last one so you've seriously lost me a bit on going deeper through this guy's work. I don't mean to tell you your business but why does it seem so important to you to focus on other people's religions rather than your own? As far as I can make of it the best use of religion seems to try and explain the bottom line of why we live our lives, then use this information to hopefully fill in some blanks on how we live our lives. So expending all this focus and effort instead on trying to break down and undermine someone else's path for no real reason just feels like time wasted that you could've spent working on yourself, I don't know. Whatever this youtube guy seems to be doing it almost feels like a cheap commercialization or even bastardization of religious practice

 No.65

>>64
>but why does it seem so important to you to focus on other people's religions rather than your own?
It seems to me that you do not believe that there is such a thing as improperly following a religion. I think you have subscribed to a particular heresy referred to as "Modernism".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wjs7WfK7rQ
To summarise it: Every man is his own Pope. It is this notion, stemming at least partially from Protestantism, that it is the individual who ultimately determines what the Truth (of the Bible, in the case of Protestants) really is. I'm sure you've heard people say that phrase before: "I'm just speaking my truth". Previous heresies were people who really held that reality was a certain way but this belief was deemed incorrect. With the heresy of Modernism however, the very notion of an objective truth is done away with. Nobody can truly be right nor wrong.
This idea that Religion is merely something personal, I think, is ironically the death of Religion itself.

 No.66

>>65
as much as I like the idea of discussing issues like this, you still haven't really explained why it matters what way the other anon practices his faith. It has no effect on you after all, he should be free to do so.

 No.67

>>66
Well firstly, I want to say that from the very beginning, my first post in this thread was No. 61. If you believe that post No. 61 was an attack on how anyone in this thread practises their religion, I believe you're going to need to explain that.
When I posted Post No.61, I was merely chiming in with Post No. 59 in that yes, yes there are Catholics who are really just claiming to be Catholic but, when questioned, reveal their views to be something along the lines of MTD. This was not an attack on anyone in this thread. It was me confirming an observed phenomenon. I don't believe Post No. 59 was an attack on anyone in this thread either.

Secondly, while I think one should be wise about when they choose to Evangelise and so I believe there are times where it would be okay to leave people alone in how they practise their religion, I don't believe it truly has no effect on me that I totally allow others to practise their religion. I believe, at the end of my life, God will judge me not just for what I did but for what I didn't do. Not speaking up when I should have will be held against me and so I cannot agree with that idea that I shouldn't attempt to bring others into the One True, Apostolic, Church. To clarify though: I made no attempt to do so in this thread.

 No.119

I wouldn't call myself particularly religious, though I won't deny the possibility of something being out there. I sometimes go to a catholic church and contribute by playing instruments.
Where religion plays out it's value imo is in those people who otherwise won't or can't think about complicated moral and philosophical questions in life.
The big secularization in the 1960s primarily affected lower income people in my eyes. Look at the urban black people and your typical white trash.
Before that time, religion would have played a big part in keeping families together and children with both of their parents.
I won't glamourize this time simply because it wasn't with how raising your kids worked and all, but at least they had two role models in their lives.
When this whole "sexual liberation" stuff came around, all the sudden single parenthood and "patchwork families" became a thing, with horrible consequences, especially for lower income and unemployed people.
Religion may be a boring and unnecessary barrier when you are a 20-something college student rebelling against your parents, but it becomes essential for social cohesion for other people.
This all is in reference to a new testament oriented christianity, but pretty much all modern mainstream religions include some form of family with a father and mother to care for their children.

 No.125

>What would you call yourself?
I am a yay-sayer.
What is there to know?



[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] [Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ All ] [ b / boo / int / reap / s / vr ] [ Home / Rules / FAQ / Friends / Legal ] [ Twitter ] [ Manage ]