Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
[Forgotten Realms] The Wall of the Faithless
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celtavian" data-source="post: 6788772" data-attributes="member: 5834"><p>It seems to me you are the one that deeply misunderstands them. Or I should say is willfully ignoring the individual parts of the religion to try to push your particular viewpoint. Sorry, I have actually studied real world religions. You are very wrong. Deeply wrong about them. You are citing loose examples that don't even begin to dig into the depth of each religion and the absurdity they believe in. You think the Forgotten Realms sending you to Wall was harsh compared to old world religions? Really? I can tell you it is fairly minor.</p><p></p><p>I was raised Catholic. You can go to hell according to the doctrine for a variety of absolutely idiotic reasons. Dying without being baptized and cleansed of original sin, according to doctrine you get a trip to hell even if you're a baby. Makes no sense, but it is doctrine. Not getting last rights when dying while having committed a mortal sin, a trip to hell by doctrine. A good Catholic will tell you they don't know for sure, but by doctrine, likely hell. These things are told you to very much in the following fashion, "Well, we don't know for sure, but this is what Catholic doctrine says." So this whole idea of atheists in heaven is not part of all Christian doctrine, not by any means. Just because The Pope says it, does not make it doctrine. There are many branches of Christianity that very much preach if you have not accepted Christ as your savior, you get a trip below. I haven't practiced Catholicism for a while, so maybe some of this has changed. But for thousands of years the above was doctrine. It affects their stance on many political issues. </p><p></p><p>This whole idea you attempted to push on us that faithlessness or doctrinal allegiance isn't a fundamental element of real world religions is very much like touching the surface of the ocean and saying all water is wet. It's shallow, false, and doesn't at all explore religion as it was in the ancient world. Many of the examples you listed are but one minority view of the religions you cited. If you explore the religions you cited, you'll find things like Muslims believing atheists are heading down to hell no matter how good they are. Many denominations of Christianity believing if you haven't acknowledged the Lord as your savior, you're damned. Many of the old pantheon religions acknowledged the existence of other gods and assumed the gods of a people would take care of those people. For example, this idea that all warriors that die in battle go to Valhalla is false. The Vikings or Nordic people didn't care where other people went after they die. That was their business and not of concern to the individuals. Pantheons handled the people that worshiped them. They left people in other areas to their gods. Monotheism pushed the idea of sole creators that handled everyone.</p><p></p><p>Let's look at Valhalla. Sure, a bunch of warriors get to enter Valhalla if they die in battle. You go to where if you die in your bed with your family? Somewhere pleasant? So according to the religious traditions of the Vikings, failing to die in battle leads to a less pleasant afterlife, in fact possibly a negative afterlife. Is this good? I would say definitely no.</p><p></p><p>Ma'at and Egyptian religious tradition was not all based on the concept of goodness as you would perceive it. It was based on what Egyptians considered good including obeying your master as a slave. The desecration of temples or blasphemy was considered a violation of Ma'at. Do you think an Egyptian would consider it acceptable to deny the existence of the gods or fail to worship them? Or would that be blasphemy and a violation of Ma'at? The Pharoah was also an integral part of deciding what was and was not Ma'at. If you denied the pharoah's status as god, you would considered committing blasphemy. Once you died, you would be eaten by a monster. </p><p></p><p>So stop trying to sell people that the Wall is evil by nature. Lots of ancient and even current religions believe worse things. You can be as good as you want, but you don't get baptized or don't do certain things you might consider stupid, you end up in a bad place. The Wall of the Faithless is no different. So trying to sell us on this false idea concerning ancient religions only works if you are allowed to speak of them in a very shallow fashion. Dig deeper you starting finding out all types of beliefs in religions that you would be complaining about and probably do complain about right now.</p><p></p><p>I'd love to see you debate baptism to a Catholic. Or argue with a priest that excommunicated a woman for divorcing her husband because he beat her. Or talk to a Baptist about atheists and hell. Or talk to a Muslim about what happens to someone that converts to a different religion even if it is still of the book. Or a Viking that dies of old age. Or a Greek that doesn't make offerings at the temple to the gods. Or an Egyptian that defies the Pharoah and denies his divinity. See if their gods according to their doctrine allow them into a good afterlife even though their doctrine says they're heading somewhere else.</p><p></p><p>The Wall of the Faithless is a very minor terror compared to some of the absolutely stupid and evil reasons you can end up in a bad place in most real world religions, modern or ancient. You can't tell me much. I was raised Catholic. We have some of the dumbest reasons for going to hell of any of the religions. We also had some of the most ridiculous ways of going to heaven of any religion like indulgences or confession. The Wall of the Faithless is a fairly minor annoyance compared to some of the stuff you have to do as a Catholic to keep your get into heaven card up to date regardless of the new happy Pope's view on things.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celtavian, post: 6788772, member: 5834"] It seems to me you are the one that deeply misunderstands them. Or I should say is willfully ignoring the individual parts of the religion to try to push your particular viewpoint. Sorry, I have actually studied real world religions. You are very wrong. Deeply wrong about them. You are citing loose examples that don't even begin to dig into the depth of each religion and the absurdity they believe in. You think the Forgotten Realms sending you to Wall was harsh compared to old world religions? Really? I can tell you it is fairly minor. I was raised Catholic. You can go to hell according to the doctrine for a variety of absolutely idiotic reasons. Dying without being baptized and cleansed of original sin, according to doctrine you get a trip to hell even if you're a baby. Makes no sense, but it is doctrine. Not getting last rights when dying while having committed a mortal sin, a trip to hell by doctrine. A good Catholic will tell you they don't know for sure, but by doctrine, likely hell. These things are told you to very much in the following fashion, "Well, we don't know for sure, but this is what Catholic doctrine says." So this whole idea of atheists in heaven is not part of all Christian doctrine, not by any means. Just because The Pope says it, does not make it doctrine. There are many branches of Christianity that very much preach if you have not accepted Christ as your savior, you get a trip below. I haven't practiced Catholicism for a while, so maybe some of this has changed. But for thousands of years the above was doctrine. It affects their stance on many political issues. This whole idea you attempted to push on us that faithlessness or doctrinal allegiance isn't a fundamental element of real world religions is very much like touching the surface of the ocean and saying all water is wet. It's shallow, false, and doesn't at all explore religion as it was in the ancient world. Many of the examples you listed are but one minority view of the religions you cited. If you explore the religions you cited, you'll find things like Muslims believing atheists are heading down to hell no matter how good they are. Many denominations of Christianity believing if you haven't acknowledged the Lord as your savior, you're damned. Many of the old pantheon religions acknowledged the existence of other gods and assumed the gods of a people would take care of those people. For example, this idea that all warriors that die in battle go to Valhalla is false. The Vikings or Nordic people didn't care where other people went after they die. That was their business and not of concern to the individuals. Pantheons handled the people that worshiped them. They left people in other areas to their gods. Monotheism pushed the idea of sole creators that handled everyone. Let's look at Valhalla. Sure, a bunch of warriors get to enter Valhalla if they die in battle. You go to where if you die in your bed with your family? Somewhere pleasant? So according to the religious traditions of the Vikings, failing to die in battle leads to a less pleasant afterlife, in fact possibly a negative afterlife. Is this good? I would say definitely no. Ma'at and Egyptian religious tradition was not all based on the concept of goodness as you would perceive it. It was based on what Egyptians considered good including obeying your master as a slave. The desecration of temples or blasphemy was considered a violation of Ma'at. Do you think an Egyptian would consider it acceptable to deny the existence of the gods or fail to worship them? Or would that be blasphemy and a violation of Ma'at? The Pharoah was also an integral part of deciding what was and was not Ma'at. If you denied the pharoah's status as god, you would considered committing blasphemy. Once you died, you would be eaten by a monster. So stop trying to sell people that the Wall is evil by nature. Lots of ancient and even current religions believe worse things. You can be as good as you want, but you don't get baptized or don't do certain things you might consider stupid, you end up in a bad place. The Wall of the Faithless is no different. So trying to sell us on this false idea concerning ancient religions only works if you are allowed to speak of them in a very shallow fashion. Dig deeper you starting finding out all types of beliefs in religions that you would be complaining about and probably do complain about right now. I'd love to see you debate baptism to a Catholic. Or argue with a priest that excommunicated a woman for divorcing her husband because he beat her. Or talk to a Baptist about atheists and hell. Or talk to a Muslim about what happens to someone that converts to a different religion even if it is still of the book. Or a Viking that dies of old age. Or a Greek that doesn't make offerings at the temple to the gods. Or an Egyptian that defies the Pharoah and denies his divinity. See if their gods according to their doctrine allow them into a good afterlife even though their doctrine says they're heading somewhere else. The Wall of the Faithless is a very minor terror compared to some of the absolutely stupid and evil reasons you can end up in a bad place in most real world religions, modern or ancient. You can't tell me much. I was raised Catholic. We have some of the dumbest reasons for going to hell of any of the religions. We also had some of the most ridiculous ways of going to heaven of any religion like indulgences or confession. The Wall of the Faithless is a fairly minor annoyance compared to some of the stuff you have to do as a Catholic to keep your get into heaven card up to date regardless of the new happy Pope's view on things. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
[Forgotten Realms] The Wall of the Faithless
Top