FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Celebrism





LittleBlackKitten
I've often come across people who have no idea what Celebrism is, since it's fairly new. Well, I figured I'd better explain it, and I've done so here so responders don't have to be commenting based on the OP (which I do realize opens it up for argument, but I don't really care since I won't change what I believe)...

In a nut shell, to be a celebrist means you are a member of Christianity, but do not believe in organized religion, church, ritualistic faith, or forcing others to believe your views, and do not believe in telling others what to believe, nor using scare tactics or fear to revolutionize others. We see many Christians today warning others about the second coming of Christ and the end of the world as we know it, and other garbage that doesn't need to be portrayed in a "repent now or die" sort of light. Celebrists don't agree with mass-fear, forcing habitual church-going, expecting perfection, and other such high-bar dance-till-I-say-stop, silly business that causes fear or ritual.

We believe that simply because other religions have different views doesn't make them WRONG, and are encouraged to incorporate pieces of other religions into the tapestry, as long as the trinity is viewed as the center, author, and cause. For example, I believe in the wiccan notion of spirit elements, and I personally am Spirit. I also believe that our star-signs and season of birth dictate who we are, to a certain extent, and it is God that put these things that way.

We believe in being a lesser impact globally, and following God's commandments. We also believe in following one's heart, soul, instincts, and whims, because there is a reason for everything under the sun, and there is always a greater purpose for everything we feel, so it is not wise to question one's own feelings, unless it is at the self-damaging point (eg smoking, drugs, ect).

Finally, we also believe in self-betterment - to become better than who you are now, and being the best human you possibly can.

Well, there you go. Celebrism!
watersoul
Interesting thoughts and it does appear on face value to be a reasonable side to Christianity, I've searched desperately for more information though, but perhaps unfortunately, without success so far, maybe it's the 'new' internet 'cloud' which needs a little time to catch up?

LittleBlackKitten
I've only met a dozen or so people who have heard and believed, so I'm not surprised google gave you nothing. So far it's been word-of-mouth (since we have no church body). Perhaps no one has made an article on it yet because of it's newness and numbers.
menino
I guess then that I am a celebrist, but I don't choose to divulge it.
I am a Christian, but I don't go to church that often.... but if celebrism starts a church of its own, I don't think I'll go to it anyways.
Its not that I don't believe in the church... its just that I dislike crowds a lot, so I'll try to go when there is less crowd, but thats a rare occassion.

Also, I don't force christianity on others, but just say common stuff like "Pray for me!", or "Thanks God!".. or Godbless and stuff like that.
I do believe in being good, as a christian and a person, but even after the celebrist is defined as you mentioned, I prefer to just be called a "practicing christian"... and perhaps let some people know that my practise is not perfect.
Dialogist
LittleBlackKitten wrote:


In a nut shell, to be a celebrist means you are a member of Christianity, but do not believe in organized religion, church, ritualistic faith, or forcing others to believe your views, and do not believe in telling others what to believe, nor using scare tactics or fear to revolutionize others. We see many Christians today warning others about the second coming of Christ and the end of the world as we know it, and other garbage that doesn't need to be portrayed in a "repent now or die" sort of light. Celebrists don't agree with mass-fear, forcing habitual church-going, expecting perfection, and other such high-bar dance-till-I-say-stop, silly business that causes fear or ritual.


It all seems very assertive and critical/disapproving/condemning of Christianity. It almost seems like Christianity. The poster above said something about 'just call yourself a Christian' or along those lines. I tend to agree with that. Not because you're making the same mistakes, but because you're a Christian if you follow Christ. There's no need for buzz words or oneupmanship in spirituality is there? Love your brethren. He whom is without sin, etc. I, like the poster above, am not a letter of the law Christian. I'm a dialogist and a symbolic numerologist and I have a natural ingrained dogmatic fear of money changers in my father's house.



Because they usually come as one of your own.
watersoul
Thought I'd fix that for you LBK, hope you don't mind the unsolicited donation...but please feel free to give them back if you prefer! Smile

LittleBlackKitten
LoL, I thought the triple 6 was funny and ironic Very Happy
watersoul
LittleBlackKitten wrote:
LoL, I thought the triple 6 was funny and ironic Very Happy


Lol, me too (I'd actually noticed it ages ago), but I just thought because a poster clearly deemed it important enough to raise the issue with a screenshot, a quick donation of Fri$'s could possibly put their perhaps troubling concerns to rest Smile
LittleBlackKitten
Quote:
It all seems very assertive and critical/disapproving/condemning of Christianity.

As the Baptists are to the Anglicans? Don't try to imply I'm arguing with Christianity, k? Thanks.

Quote:
It almost seems like Christianity. The poster above said something about 'just call yourself a Christian' or along those lines. I tend to agree with that. Not because you're making the same mistakes, but because you're a Christian if you follow Christ. There's no need for buzz words or oneupmanship in spirituality is there?

It IS Christanity; it is a DENOMONATION. Obviously you have little experience with denomination. And no, no one said to just call myself a christian, that's a false statement. It is NOT a buzz word, oneupmanship, or anything of the sort. I would appreciate the assumptions to leave.
Dialogist
It was more worthy of a screen shot than google's no results page maybe. And I knew it'd change on response so I had to capture the moment. The disses were just a lead up to making you look sinister enough to branded with the mark of cain. I meant no offense. Just a joke...

However, a lot of truth is said in jest. Your main post seemed highly critical of mainstream Christianity, denominations or not. It seemed to be evaluating your beliefs against the invalidity of theirs. Or rather, saying we don't do that, we don't do that and we don't do that either. I mean the "fear", "force", "scare tactics" and "other garbage" doesn't leave a great deal for me to "assume" now does it?

And you're quite entitled to hold these beliefs, however you seem to place your own way of thinking above that, judging it, attacking it and claiming righteousness over it, and ironically, its arguably that way of thinking that made you arrive at "Celebrism" in the first place.

So yeah, nice work on that.
LittleBlackKitten
I hold nothing over nothing; see, here you go on again with your silly assumptions and claims that make no base in reality. Furthermore, I can't help but notice you seem to think I care about what you think or believe about my faith in Celebrism. It is in fact so anti-factioned that it likely won't ever BE on google because we don't BELIEVE in narrowing ANYONE down. Its more accurately named a nondenomination rather than a denomination or faction.

I would really appreciate you getting your facts straight and head on properly before you attempt to look wise or smart because when you make wild accusations and points like you are doing now, you end up looking the fool. You are not a Celebrist, and you are not knowledged in it, its tendencies, wills, intentions, or what we do or do not like or seem to agree with.

If you knew anything at all about people you would realize how things are worded may mean one thing to one person, and something completely different to another. While YOU think I sounded critical of Christianity, I myself meant it more as an indication that we dislike common scare tactics and being forced into a pew every sunday for no real reason other than "we've been doing it for generations".

If you intend to make wild assumptions and judgment calls on that which you know nothing at all, I will ask this topic to be closed because I will not have someone wildly tossing false comments about...
truespeed
LittleBlackKitten wrote:
I've only met a dozen or so people who have heard and believed,


The 12 disciples?

Your on google now.



In the top search term the .com is still available. Smile
LittleBlackKitten
Rofl! Thanks truespeed, that was a laugh I needed! Very Happy
Dialogist
LittleBlackKitten wrote:
I can't help but notice you seem to think I care about what you think or believe about my faith in Celebrism.


a) Nobody made you post this thread 'figuring you'd better explain it'. It would be equally as ridiculous of me to say, "who the hell cares?" But clearly, I'm in here entertaining this blatant Symphonism wannabe debacle.
b) You're clearly getting a little bit emotional and defensive about it for somebody who doesn't care what I think or believe about it (which, as a philosophy itself, was never opposed, but shared and agreed with in some cases) but no, the opposition is towards you being a hypocrite by doing the same things you accuse it of. So...
c) How observant of you.

LittleBlackKitten wrote:
It is in fact so anti-factioned that it likely won't ever BE on google


Ahem!

LittleBlackKitten wrote:
I would really appreciate you getting your facts straight and head on properly before you attempt to look wise or smart because when you make wild accusations and points like you are doing now, you end up looking the fool. You are not a Celebrist, and you are not knowledged in it, its tendencies, wills, intentions, or what we do or do not like or seem to agree with.


There's so many things incorrect about this that I'm struggling to pick one to start with. First of all, my facts are straight. You're criticizing a certain religion for its bad influence on people, your chosen apathy of conviction notwithstanding, you're doing the exact same thing you criticize it for. Except they look more credible right now because they practice what they preach. You preach and don't practice anything. Again, I never knocked Celebrism (I could, it's lazy, selfish and self serving. It seeks redemption through entitlement and expectation without trial, tribulation, obligation or duty) but I wasn't initially. I was saying that criticizing and insulting a group of people due to their religious persuasion isn't very "Christian" (just as you judge the actions of the certain forms of "Christianity" which you condemn - and trust me, you have no clue whatsoever about either of them) and it certainty doesn't warrant any title suggesting of or inclusive of anything remotely "cerebral". The only way I will end up looking like a fool is I keep replying to "garbage" like somebody claiming that "garbage" is a respectful way to describe somebody's religious beliefs, in hope of making their own look more respectful. This is how I will end up looking like a fool - If I keep lowering myself to point out pre-school contradictory inconsistencies like this to somebody who seems to have the same relationship with logic as they do with true, real, actual Christianity. Try this instead: Just forgive me?

LittleBlackKitten wrote:
If you knew anything at all about people you would realize how things are worded may mean one thing to one person, and something completely different to another. While YOU think I sounded critical of Christianity, I myself meant it more as an indication that we dislike common scare tactics and being forced into a pew every sunday for no real reason other than "we've been doing it for generations".


I've not seen any examples of Christianity forcing anyone to do anything in modern times. Maybe this a new branch off non-denominational sect that I've not heard of before. Maybe they think that "wild accusations" and "judgment calls" such as...

LittleBlackKitten wrote:
forcing others to believe your views, and do not believe in telling others what to believe, nor using scare tactics or fear to revolutionize others.


and

LittleBlackKitten wrote:
We see many Christians today warning others about the second coming of Christ and the end of the world as we know it, and other garbage that doesn't need to be portrayed in a "repent now or die" sort of light.


and

LittleBlackKitten wrote:
Celebrists don't agree with mass-fear, forcing habitual church-going, expecting perfection, and other such high-bar dance-till-I-say-stop, silly business that causes fear or ritual.


and my personal favorite:

LittleBlackKitten wrote:

We believe that simply because other religions have different views doesn't make them WRONG


...are all are statements which should be taken seriously. Maybe this version of Christianity, much like "Celebrism" is something you've invented for some fri points or something? Either way, I wouldn't be interested in hearing any more about either.

LittleBlackKitten wrote:
I will not have someone wildly tossing false comments about...


You and me both, LittleBlackKitten. To be honest, I think I'd rather gnaw off my own leg and beat myself to death with it than read any more of these fantastical "The Kettle is black" yours sincerely, Pot, philosophies.
LittleBlackKitten
Lock this post please, next passing administrator. This has turned into an angry gong show of accusations, assumptions, and attacking comments from Dialogist.
deanhills
@LittleBlackKitten. I understand where you are coming from, however what difference would there really be as all of the other Christian religions claim to be purer than the other. Once you start to make a religion out of celebrism, it may just be one of many different varieties of the same thing. Also, how does this equate with accepting everyone else's point of view, i.e. below?
Quote:
We believe that simply because other religions have different views doesn't make them WRONG
Doesn't the existence of celebrism imply that other views are wrong?
Bikerman
Just a passing note :
666 is actually NOT the number of the beast, according to a fairly recent study.
Scientists at Oxford University used modern imagining techniques on one of the oldest surviving parchments - Papyrus 115 - which contains Revelations. This study revealed that the actual number is 616, not 666.
In fact this alternative has been known about for some time - before the 2005 study - and there is still some debate. Many support the notion of 666 because it is a numeric 'translation' of 'Nero', who they believe was Emperor at the time and was certainly pretty beastly to Christians. I have never believed that to be correct - largely because I'm pretty sure that Revelations was written after Nero's death in 68CE.
tingkagol
truespeed wrote:


In the top search term the .com is still available. Smile

Damn. That was quick. If only google did the same for other sites. lol
Bikerman
Quote:
We believe that simply because other religions have different views doesn't make them WRONG, and are encouraged to incorporate pieces of other religions into the tapestry, as long as the trinity is viewed as the center, author, and cause.
Well, that is a problem right there.
No other religion states that the trinity is centre, author and cause, so what you are essentially saying is that other religions are not wrong as long as they are Christianity....
Quote:
I also believe that our star-signs and season of birth dictate who we are, to a certain extent, and it is God that put these things that way.
But this is a testable hypothesis so no faith is required. In fact it has been thoroughly tested and found to be wrong. Therefore this is an example of faith being in direct contradiction of the evidence.
http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/astrology_checklist
http://atheism.about.com/b/2006/04/20/time-twin-study-discredits-astrology.htm
http://www.astrology-and-science.com/hpage.htm
Quote:
so it is not wise to question one's own feelings, unless it is at the self-damaging point (eg smoking, drugs, ect).

and
Quote:
Finally, we also believe in self-betterment - to become better than who you are now, and being the best human you possibly can.

I don't know how those two can fit together. Surely you must examine your own feelings, motivations, reactions & behaviours in order to become a 'better' human?
Bondings
Closed on the request of the topic starter.
-close-
Related topics
New Link in Evolution?Celebrism is o k?
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Philosophy and Religion

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.