[space]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

not to hold people back. the churches don't want anyone to STOP sinning. they just want you to buy into their bullshit that they will clear you of your so called sins.

in this way they have you at their mercy, at their beck and call. for they are the only ones who will clear you of the sins they say you have.

as far as I know, only catholics are into "clearing" sin. isn't GOD supposed to do that?

I wouldn't know....I practice my own faith.

Originally Posted by space

I ♥ VOODOU

[space]

quoted for page propagation.

\/\/\/

Originally Posted by Glice

Sin, as in the prohibition on negative human acts, isn't vastly different to various reward theories, or theories on evolutionary symbiosis, or affirmative behavioural theories. You could say that 'sin controls' - and there's bit where you'd be right - but you could just as easily say 'sin is an anthropocentric articulation of the evolutionary principle of reward systems in socialised animals'. I know it's not precisely how sin is used in religion, but at base, isn't sin the principle that if you fuck over another human, you will get fucked over back? Ok, you can disagree on the agency of that reciprocal fucking over, but surely that's a very basic principle of socialised existence (and therefore not exclusive to the religious dialogue, except in a piddling nomenklatura)?

I ♥ reciprocal fucking

[Rob Instigator]

Originally Posted by space

as far as I know, only catholics are into "clearing" sin. isn't GOD supposed to do that?

I wouldn't know....I practice my own faith.

the "god" of christianity does not clear sin. according to the new testament, jesus sacrificed himself to atone for all of humanity's sins, past and future, so there should be no more reason to worry or fret about sin. it has been cleared. some christian churches claim that only by "believing" in jesus and "accepting him as your lord and saviour" does this "sin-atonement" actually work. that is bullshit they made up to cover their asses. according to the bible that is all nonsense. Jesus was actually preaching the abolition of all organized religion.
any christian church is pushing BULLSHIT for they know what Jesus was really after and they have to cover it up with bullshit to keep people from understanding it. Even now, many roman catholic masses are still heldd in latin in south and central america, to keep the people from understanding what is going on and to keep the "magic" alive, the flim flam. They also limit access to actual spanish bibles so that eventhe literate cannot learn for themselves.

The hebrew faith does not believ in a heaven nor a hell, therefore they also do not believe in "sin" as the christians do. they beleive all people end up in an eternal "sleep" after death.

Buddhists do not believe in heaven or hell, or in sin. one's actions reverberate through the cosmos, whether good or bad, and affect one's soul's travels as the soul goes from new body to new body.

Hindu belief does not account for "sin" either

[Rob Instigator]

Originally Posted by Glice

Sin, as in the prohibition on negative human acts, isn't vastly different to various reward theories, or theories on evolutionary symbiosis, or affirmative behavioural theories. You could say that 'sin controls' - and there's bit where you'd be right - but you could just as easily say 'sin is an anthropocentric articulation of the evolutionary principle of reward systems in socialised animals'. I know it's not precisely how sin is used in religion, but at base, isn't sin the principle that if you fuck over another human, you will get fucked over back? Ok, you can disagree on the agency of that reciprocal fucking over, but surely that's a very basic principle of socialised existence (and therefore not exclusive to the religious dialogue, except in a piddling nomenklatura)?

nope. as far as "sin" goes, it is not about a karmic retribution. sin is, in christianity, a stain upon the soul. sin damages the soul in that sense.
catholics believe that some sins are irreparable, and will automaticall land you in hell, even though jesus died to atone for all opf humanity's sins, including the ones the church deems "mortal sins". Hell, the stupid fuckingh catholic church created the idea of "original sin" to essentially force every believer into thinking they were born sinful, that a baby newborn is already stained in it's soul. bunch of fucking assholes.

karma works through good and bad or even inaction, and has nothing to do with what christians have termed "sin."

[space]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

the "god" of christianity does not clear sin. according to the new testament, jesus sacrificed himself to atone for all of humanity's sins, past and futurer

I'm sorry, when I said "GOD", would you have preferred I used the term "trinity"? hah

what I meant was....MAN does not clear MAN'S sin (unless yr catholic).

me? I'm into hardcore Newtonian physics coupled with a healthy dose of the Heisenberg uncertainty principal, flavored with Thee Olde Tyme Religion and KRS1....and voodou....lots and lots of voodou.

bless.

[Glice]

I may be mis-reading you, but you seem to be suggesting that karma is an economic balancing of good/ bad acts, and that sin is some absolutist, irrevocable act; but you also mention in the post directly above the notions of atonement, and it's pretty clear that the balancing of sins, relative to prayer and atonement, is a similar distribution of 'moral economies', if you will; similar, again, to anthropic evolutionary principles.

Also, you've read and emphasised only one aspect of the New Testament. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I am saying that you're not entirely right. There's plenty in there about entering heaven through Christ alone. I don't necessarily agree with it (for two reasons: I don't agree with sola scriptura and my relationship to 'religious pluralism' is a huge and sprawling wreck at the moment), but using the Bible against itself or others is a pretty foolish enterprise, in my mind.

[space]

Originally Posted by Glice

using the Bible against itself or others is a pretty foolish enterprise, in my mind.

LOL ROB ---- you should be ASHAMED.

[Rob Instigator]

karma relies on the belief that one's actions affect the world, and that good actions lead to spreading good and that bad actions lead to spreading bad.

Sin, in the christian sense, is purely a stain upon the soul.

[Rob Instigator]

using the bible is a pretty foolish enterprise

[space]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

using the bible is a pretty foolish enterprise

Eloh'el.

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

the "god" of christianity does not clear sin. according to the new testament...yaddayaddayadda...

[Rob Instigator]

never been afraid to look foolish!

[space]

and by the way, if you see yr mom this weekend, would you be sure and tell her SATAN, SATAN, SATAN!!!!

[Rob Instigator]

LOVE how trhat song ends with cows and bowling and shit.


dig the replicant quote on yr sig too man

[space]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

LOVE how trhat song ends with cows and bowling and shit.

yr thinking of 22 Going On 23.

and thanks!

"time to die!"

[Rob Instigator]

god it is all a hallucinagenic mess in my head.

yr right.

[space]

those links should help.

[Glice]

I prefer this version.

[space]

you would, you cunt.

me? I charge $30 an hour.

[DeadDiscoDildo]

Originally Posted by Glice

Sin, as in the prohibition on negative human acts, isn't vastly different to various reward theories, or theories on evolutionary symbiosis, or affirmative behavioural theories. You could say that 'sin controls' - and there's bit where you'd be right - but you could just as easily say 'sin is an anthropocentric articulation of the evolutionary principle of reward systems in socialised animals'. I know it's not precisely how sin is used in religion, but at base, isn't sin the principle that if you fuck over another human, you will get fucked over back? Ok, you can disagree on the agency of that reciprocal fucking over, but surely that's a very basic principle of socialised existence (and therefore not exclusive to the religious dialogue, except in a piddling nomenklatura)?

That's more karma than sin.

[Glice]

No it's fucking not! Have any of you pricks read the fucking cathechism? No? Fuck off then.