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="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 6788915" data-attributes="member: 2067"><p>I don't want to dig TOO deep into RW theology here, but I do want to be clear on a few points.</p><p>[sblock]</p><p></p><p>That's not a correct understanding of the sacrament. The usual functional work-around for this is the age of accountability, but that's a bit non-doctrinal, so why don't we just ask the source:</p><p></p><p>...so, "We're reasonably confident God's not sending babies to Hell, guys." </p><p></p><p></p><p>That's a novel proposition - the sacrements aren't considered universally essential (or else every Catholic would be a priest!), and not having the Annointing of the Sick or the Viaticum (which isn't itself even a sacrament) certainly isn't among the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortal_sin#Mortal_sins" target="_blank">mortal sins</a> listed in the CCC. Though there ARE a lot of things on there I imagine many Catholics have frequent need of repenting of. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> </p><p></p><p></p><p>Nah, but it's basically his job to interpret the Bible for Catholics, and he says that God's love trumps all, even non-belief, which I've gotta say, is pretty consistent with the whole religious message of Catholicism. If someone wants to dispute his interpretation, they're going to have to put some effort into actually changing his mind, do some exegesis, develop some Catechismal strategies, not just say "You're WRONG, Holy Father!" </p><p></p><p></p><p>Lets not blend Catholicism with the many branches of Christianity - that does a disservice to both of 'em. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> (And poor Eastern Orthodox, always the outlier in these convos!) If you'd like to chat about what some Protestants believe in regards to an eternal Hell for non-believers, things get more interesting and more complex in a hurry, especially when you weave in the particularly American branches of fundamentalist Protestantism that tend to dominate religious conversation in the States these days, so it'd be useful to lock down your specific flavor of Christianity before we start talking about what that specific flavor believes. Hell, especially, is one of those things that a disagreement on can give you a reason to start a whole new sect of Protestantism! </p><p></p><p>I've no doubt that there's some specific flavors who would probably embrace an eternal Hell for people who don't believe their specific flavor, but these tend to be fundamentalisms, which are inherently non-traditional anyway (and, I might add, with a particular interest in tribalism that is quite the opposite of the way most traditional religious theology is expressed), despite the amount of time given in the current media cycle to those who adhere to fundamentalisms. Consistent theology isn't what they're interested in. </p><p></p><p></p><p>These are all pretty surface understandings of these belief systems. For instance, in Islam, <a href="http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=2&verse=256" target="_blank">this Qu'ranic verse</a> can be VERY important in understanding the nature of what belief means in Islam, and under what criteria one becomes an "unbeliever." </p><p>[/sblock]</p><p></p><p></p><p>It's not good as most of us would understand it, but it is <em>fair</em>. If you want a heroic afterlife, die a heroic death. It doesn't matter if you think Thor is unworthy of worship or if you burned down an orphanage or if you saved innocent lives. </p><p></p><p>The Wall isn't fair, so it fails to be like Valhalla. You don't have to be good to avoid the Wall, you have to be <em>devout</em>. Which isn't the same (unlike in monotheisms). And you do this in a world where the gods are often not worthy of devotion (again, unlike in monotheisms). Valhalla was never won by praising the gods. who you might understandably often deride - stupid Thor hitting the mead hall with his lightning bolt, burning it to the ground, wreckin' all the mead. </p><p></p><p></p><p>The idea of an ancient egyptian committing blasphemy is entirely ahistorical and irrelevant to both of those ideas. Blasphemy can only happen where there is orthodoxy and there's no such thing as orthodoxy in ancient egyptian religion (in part because there was no central authority - it was cultural). </p><p></p><p></p><p>I've talked to a lot of those people (though I'd hardly call them debates - there's nothing to prove!), and I've heard from those that are long gone from this world through those that have studied them. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm not inclined to stop telling the truth. The Wall fails to be like anything in the real world. The Real World afterlives aren't nearly so monstrous. That's fine. It can be monstrous - we can have villains to fight against in our D&D settings. We should stop imagining that it is anything other than that, though, and treat it for what it is - a horrible fate inflicted on undeserving souls for the enrichment of a system whose benefit of this torment incriminates the whole thing as detestable. That's a valid character narrative, and a valid campaign arc, just as overthrowing the lich of Thay is.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 6788915, member: 2067"] I don't want to dig TOO deep into RW theology here, but I do want to be clear on a few points. [sblock] That's not a correct understanding of the sacrament. The usual functional work-around for this is the age of accountability, but that's a bit non-doctrinal, so why don't we just ask the source: ...so, "We're reasonably confident God's not sending babies to Hell, guys." That's a novel proposition - the sacrements aren't considered universally essential (or else every Catholic would be a priest!), and not having the Annointing of the Sick or the Viaticum (which isn't itself even a sacrament) certainly isn't among the [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortal_sin#Mortal_sins"]mortal sins[/URL] listed in the CCC. Though there ARE a lot of things on there I imagine many Catholics have frequent need of repenting of. :) Nah, but it's basically his job to interpret the Bible for Catholics, and he says that God's love trumps all, even non-belief, which I've gotta say, is pretty consistent with the whole religious message of Catholicism. If someone wants to dispute his interpretation, they're going to have to put some effort into actually changing his mind, do some exegesis, develop some Catechismal strategies, not just say "You're WRONG, Holy Father!" Lets not blend Catholicism with the many branches of Christianity - that does a disservice to both of 'em. :) (And poor Eastern Orthodox, always the outlier in these convos!) If you'd like to chat about what some Protestants believe in regards to an eternal Hell for non-believers, things get more interesting and more complex in a hurry, especially when you weave in the particularly American branches of fundamentalist Protestantism that tend to dominate religious conversation in the States these days, so it'd be useful to lock down your specific flavor of Christianity before we start talking about what that specific flavor believes. Hell, especially, is one of those things that a disagreement on can give you a reason to start a whole new sect of Protestantism! I've no doubt that there's some specific flavors who would probably embrace an eternal Hell for people who don't believe their specific flavor, but these tend to be fundamentalisms, which are inherently non-traditional anyway (and, I might add, with a particular interest in tribalism that is quite the opposite of the way most traditional religious theology is expressed), despite the amount of time given in the current media cycle to those who adhere to fundamentalisms. Consistent theology isn't what they're interested in. These are all pretty surface understandings of these belief systems. For instance, in Islam, [URL="http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=2&verse=256"]this Qu'ranic verse[/URL] can be VERY important in understanding the nature of what belief means in Islam, and under what criteria one becomes an "unbeliever." [/sblock] It's not good as most of us would understand it, but it is [I]fair[/I]. If you want a heroic afterlife, die a heroic death. It doesn't matter if you think Thor is unworthy of worship or if you burned down an orphanage or if you saved innocent lives. The Wall isn't fair, so it fails to be like Valhalla. You don't have to be good to avoid the Wall, you have to be [I]devout[/I]. Which isn't the same (unlike in monotheisms). And you do this in a world where the gods are often not worthy of devotion (again, unlike in monotheisms). Valhalla was never won by praising the gods. who you might understandably often deride - stupid Thor hitting the mead hall with his lightning bolt, burning it to the ground, wreckin' all the mead. The idea of an ancient egyptian committing blasphemy is entirely ahistorical and irrelevant to both of those ideas. Blasphemy can only happen where there is orthodoxy and there's no such thing as orthodoxy in ancient egyptian religion (in part because there was no central authority - it was cultural). I've talked to a lot of those people (though I'd hardly call them debates - there's nothing to prove!), and I've heard from those that are long gone from this world through those that have studied them. I'm not inclined to stop telling the truth. The Wall fails to be like anything in the real world. The Real World afterlives aren't nearly so monstrous. That's fine. It can be monstrous - we can have villains to fight against in our D&D settings. We should stop imagining that it is anything other than that, though, and treat it for what it is - a horrible fate inflicted on undeserving souls for the enrichment of a system whose benefit of this torment incriminates the whole thing as detestable. That's a valid character narrative, and a valid campaign arc, just as overthrowing the lich of Thay is. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
[Forgotten Realms] The Wall of the Faithless
Top