Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Observation Bar' started by moustache, Jan 3, 2007.
I think he just had a limited number of check box options for the poll, hence the cramming together...
"Baptist" and "Methodist" could simply have been placed under "Protestant" (though students of Christian history would not classify these strictly as "protestant", it is still generally understood this way), and "Mormon" and "Christian Science" could have been separated. This would have made more sense, perhaps.
I, too, am "supposed" to be Catholic. Born and raised in the Catholic church until I reached my junior year in high school when I started learning about other faiths. Now I just consider myself a Christian without the need for any other label, which really honks my family off, especially my mother. [huh]
You sound like an Episcopalian!
Agnostics are technically atheists; more accurately, "sceptical atheists." From Boedder's book Natural Theology,
The word atheist suggests the idea of a man living without regard for God. If he does so, because he thinks that there is no sufficient reason for believing in God's existence, he may be called a theoretical atheist; if on the other hand, he admits that existence, but disregards the law of God in regulating his free actions, he will then be called a practical atheist. In this place we have not to treat of the consequences of practical atheism except in so far as they are included in those connected with atheism maintained as a theory. Confining ourselves to the theoretical atheists, we have again to distinguish dogmatic and sceptical atheism. A dogmatic atheist is one who asserts without doubt, "There is no God;" whereas a sceptical atheist, commonly called an agnostic, maintains only that we can know nothing definite about the First Cause of things...The objection that may be raised to it by agnostics may become less if they will observe that the name atheist taken by itself has been defined to mean one who acts as if there were no God.* Agnostics can hardly deny that they do this. "Worship of the silent sort" has indeed been pronounced fitting before the "altar of the Unknowable." But is such an evanescent homage, whether it be fitting or not, really sufficient?
There is really no such thing as outright denying that God exists, absolutely. That's why Bertrand Russell referred to himself as a "tea-pot Atheist." That is, the existence of God may be highly unlikely, unlikely to the point that conforming one's life to belief in Him would be foolish, as unlikely that there was a tea-pot orbiting earth, but there is always a possibility that God exists.
I was allowed only 10 poll choices.I know they are different but had to draw the line somewhere.Just don't check a box i guess.Sorry.
If i had lumped Catholic and Methodist or Lutheran together somebody would have complained as well.
Maybe i shouldn't have asked such a question.Although it looks like quite a few are saying which religion in their post,not the poll.
Besides,if you check a box with two,how would anyone know??
We went to Peachtree Road Methodist Church. My dad was Youth Choir Director there. Much later we became members of an ELCA Lutheran church and were shocked yet pleased we could drink alcohol!
I'm not sure why--they're as Protestant as any other groups out there, being both descended from the Church of England. Baptists are popularly, though wrongly, supposed to have come out of the Anabaptist "radical reformation," but the vast majority of Baptist groups (in England and the US, at any rate) are actually descended from Independents that came to the US in the colonial era to escape repression by the state church in England.
The Methodists, likewise, were founded by the Wesley brothers, both ministers in the Church of England. They were originally a collection of informal clubs or societies, and so didn't officially split off from the CoE, but their beliefs and practices were pretty much taken from the Anglicans.
While I was raised in a strict irish Roman Catholic household wherein Mass attendance was manditoryeach and every Sunday I would have to say that today, after much questioning and soul searching, I would place myself somewhere between Zen Buddist and flat out Agnostic
fftopic: Seward is one of my favourite figures in American history, Scotrace. He is once reported to have responded to a man who ranted about being 'disappointed' in a certain matter he, Seward, was not the man to be lectured on disappointment, given that he had lost out on the 1860 Republican nomination only to see it go to a minor prairie lawyer.
He rose above that to become one of Lincoln's staunchest supporters and personal friend during the Civil War, and was a consumate diplomat and skilful politician with a sense of humour to rival Lincoln's own. He was also earmarked for assassination as part of the conspiracy that claimed Lincoln's life, and was attacked by the knife-wielding Lewis Powell while he lay incapacited in his bed recovering from a carriage accident. He recovered, but later, when showing the knife wounds to a friends, is reported to have said that he had 'deserved' the honour of dying when Lincoln did, and wished he had done so.
The Episcopalian anecdote would have delighted him.
For the rest of his life, all photographs of him were posed to hide the nasty scar on his face. He went from chiseled and handsome to dour and sour-faced as a result of the attack.
It is impossible for us to imagine the horror of that night.
fftopic: Photographs taken of Powell after his capture reveal
a troubled personality, the depth of which might preclude
his standing trial today. I always thought Mrs Surratt innocent,
and a victim of the assassination conspiracy. How her son enlisted
in the Swiss Guards, and later escaped the hangman's noose is
another peculiar historic twist.
Only if one confines oneself to theoretical atheists.
Though i do not, i know many people who absolutely deny the possibility of the existence of a deity or deities. I am what is known as "weak atheist" (i prefer nontheist).
excellent discussion here:
See above. Some weak atheists would claim the agnostics as part of their flock.
Kind of sounds schizophrenic:
"Yes, no, maybe." lol
Could be a Monty Python sketch.
"Protestant" would include Lutheran (obviously), Reformed/Presbyterian, and Anglican, though Anglican has little relationship with the other two. These were the churches formed in protest of Catholocism. They wanted to create a replacement for Catholocism, both in a personal sense, and a socio-political one. Other denominations, like the "English Baptists", Wesleyan/Methodist, etc, were not formed under the same curcumstances. They are a further "refinement" if you will. (for example, "Particlar Baptists" are theologically one step further "refined" from Reformed/Presbyterianism.) The leaders/founders of some of these groups were originally Protestants, they then saw, in one way or another, that Protestantism didn't go far enough for them, theologically or politically. The political aspirations of the Protestant denominations did not sit well with some.
Anabaptists (and there were MANY different groups with this label...often with widely varying theologies) never claimed to be "Protestant", being as they were persecuted by Protestants almost as much as they were by Catholics. (Surviving Anabaptist groups would include Mennonites, Amish, Hutterian Brethren, etc.)
Baptists (English/American) have no direct connection to 16th/17th century German Anabaptists, though they can be theologically similar.
Modern Moravians have little to do with Jan Hus (a "pre-Protestant Protestant") either! In the 18th century, under the leadership of Graf Zinzendorf, various separitist individuals and groups in Germany were conglomerated under the "Moravian" title (Moravians are Arminian...Hus was not!). They were "ancestors" of Methodism. Wesley was influenced by them perhaps more so than the Anglican church that he came from.
For most purposes, though (especially for things like this poll), the term "Protestant" is sufficient to cover all these groups.
I usually do not discuss my faith out of concern for being lumped in with the neo-pagan croud, which I am not...
i was raised in the Salvation Army, but was confirmed in the Anglican Church about 5 years ago. It suits me very well.
Pardon this Lutheran Explanation.
Lutheranism is best explained by a fairly large book called "The Book of Concord" which contains the outlined doctrines of Lutheranism and their biblical references to explain the doctrine. It also answers challenges to the doctrine. As a whole they are regarded as the Lutheran Confessions, a "we believe this to be true" type of confession. The ELCA, which stands for "The Evangelical Lutheran Church of America," has stepped further and further away from the doctrinal belief of Lutheranism as a whole and while many individual churches have retained the Confessions, the governing body has not.
Concord refers to "being in agreement" in the case of the Book of Concord.
The Missouri Synod is in a state of flux where there may be a split over the Confessions and some will join the ELCA or form their own Synod. WELS is the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod and is a fairly conservative Synod.
Synod means "to walk together" and much like Concord means to be in agreement.
The Missouri and Wisconsin aspect has to do with where the group met to put together the governing body.
When you go to a Lutheran Church the questions are:
1) Are they Confessional as in holding to the Lutheran Confessions
2) are they a Word and Sacrament church.
Yes to both and you have a good chance of being at a "Lutheran" Lutheran Church.
If you want to know what it means to be Lutheran it is good to read the Book of Concord ( I am in the middle of it) and to see what is going on there is a book called "What's going on with the ELCA" that spells out where the governing body is moving away from the Confessions.
I didn't vote because my religion wasn't represented
I was baptised by my parents before the age of one as a Lutheran. I went to both a Lutheran and Baptist church growing up but attended Catholic school.
Currently, I would not consider myself to be religious but if I HAVE to pick a religion, I would say I follow the Yoruban traditional religion. I am a child of Oshun.
The Vatican is in Rome.