NationStates Jolt Archive

Just a poll. It's interesting to know.

Oops, forgot to put the poll part in.

Just so everyone knows, I'd rather not have any religious debate in this thread.

Yes is if you believe in a religion.
No is if you don't.
Other is for... other.

Thread tools, top right corner.

Thread tools, top right corner.

Thanks.

Just so everyone knows, I'd rather not have any religious debate in this thread.

good luck my naive friend.

As I define religious, no. I am not religious. I do, however consider myelf a christian and I have faith in Christ.

How do you define religious?

As I define religious, no. I am not religious. I do, however consider myelf a christian and I have faith in Christ.

no im not.

and i tend to forget that there are people who are sincerely religious.

How do you define religious?

Uh... for the purposes of this thread. Yes is if you believe in a religion. No is if you don't. Other is for... other.

good luck my naive friend.

:D

Uh... for the purposes of this thread. Yes is if you believe in a religion. No is if you don't. Other is for... other.

I was talking to LG. I was curious as to what he meant.

I was talking to LG. I was curious as to what he meant.

Oh. Okay.

Religion is a construct of men in order to gain influence by exploiting the faithful. I know that sounds very negative, and it can be. But not always. Sometimes religion can bring communities together and accomplish great works. But it's still a construct of men and I have no faith in them. *nod*

I do understand that. I happen to disagree, but I do understand.

I'm unsure what other entails :3

But anyway, I chose Religious because I'm a Christian.

How do you define religious?

Religion is a construct of men in order to gain influence by exploiting the faithful. I know that sounds very negative, and it can be. But not always. Sometimes religion can bring communities together and accomplish great works. But it's still a construct of men and I have no faith in them. *nod*

I do understand that. I happen to disagree, but I do understand.

:)

I am in the sense that I believe in God. But I'm not in the sense that I believe that I am God.

Uh... for the purposes of this thread. Yes is if you believe in a religion. No is if you don't. Other is for... other.
I believe in Jesus Christ and his teachings, but not the denominational dogma.

I grew up in a Presbyterian household but since the age of about 14 i've been on the nice slope to atheism

I believe in Jesus Christ and his teachings, but not the denominational dogma.

I consider that religious.

Religion is a construct of men in order to gain influence by exploiting the faithful. I know that sounds very negative, and it can be. But not always. Sometimes religion can bring communities together and accomplish great works. But it's still a construct of men and I have no faith in them. *nod*

I'm...kinda? The same way. I don't attend church (for several reasons), but I watch the Coral Ridge Hour every once in awhile. I'm a Christian, and I (for the most part) agree with John Calvin's summary of the Christian Faith, but adhering to a theological philosophy does not equal subscribing to a denomination.

Sooo...I take the middle ground. ;)

I am a Catholic. I love the Lord Jesus Christ and the Church He established. I nurture my spiritual life with the Sacraments of the Church, and like the wayfarer, subsist on alms from Our Mother the Church.

Uh... for the purposes of this thread. Yes is if you believe in a religion. No is if you don't. Other is for... other.

Heh other than yes or no? So perhaps maybe, or I dunno, or yeah sometimes?

Ohh and it's a yes for me.

Heh other than yes or no? So perhaps maybe, or I dunno, or yeah sometimes?

Ohh and it's a yes for me.

Dunno what it would be used for. Depends on the person, I guess.

I practice Deeper Lutheranism.

I am a Catholic. I love the Lord Jesus Christ and the Church He established. I nurture my spiritual life with the Sacraments of the Church, and like the wayfarer, subsist on alms from Our Mother the Church.
So basically you're a begging cannibal who believes in magical zombies.

I'm an atheist.

I'm apatheistic for lack of a better term. Religion plays no part at all in my life, and if it weren't for NSG I'd probably forget it exists for weeks at a time.

Ignostic.

So no, not religious.

Nope. I rather believe in myself than to a god.

Ignostic.

So no, not religious.
Don't you mean agnostic? Or is this something else?

I believe in religion, I even saw one once!


...


What? Someone was going to say it!

Who wants some popcorn while we wait for the flamewar to start?

Don't you mean agnostic? Or is this something else?

It means that he/she doesn't care if there are gods or not (apathetic agnosticism).

I voted for 'other'. This is because I believe there is a god. But not a god who that can influence people. He made us, and then we are all on our own. I don't fully believe in the bible or qur'an.

But, I was just wondering, how can anyone believe in god and jesus christ and not follow any religion. That doesn't make any sense to me. :)

Ignostic.

So no, not religious.

Isn't it impossible to consider yourself ignostic? Since ignostic means you don't know about religion or god or any of that?

I'm not a Christian, but many Christians believe that Christianity is about a personal relationship with God rather than a formalised religion.

But is their understanding of that God based on the religion?

I voted for 'other'. This is because I believe there is a god. But not a god who that can influence people. He made us, and then we are all on our own. I don't fully believe in the bible or qur'an.

But, I was just wondering, how can anyone believe in god and jesus christ and not follow any religion. That doesn't make any sense to me. :)

I'm not a Christian, but many Christians believe that Christianity is about a personal relationship with God rather than a formalised religion.

Isn't it impossible to consider yourself ignostic? Since ignostic means you don't know about religion or god or any of that?
It doesn't mean I don't know about any religion or god... I mean, I've read about them. I consider the question "does god exist?" to be both meaningless and absurd though... which seems to put me in the ignostic sort of category.

I'm not a Christian, but many Christians believe that Christianity is about a personal relationship with God rather than a formalised religion.

People with a personal relationship with God could be muslims too :)
But the thing is they call God Allah, but to me, it doesn't make any difference, as they are both kind of the same, as they created us and tell us what is best in life.

I'm not a Christian, but many Christians believe that Christianity is about a personal relationship with God rather than a formalised religion.

That's actually the view of Doctor James Kennedy of the Coral Ridge Hour.

Nevermind he's a Presbyterian. Not sure how that one worked out.

I believe in religion, I even saw one once!


...


What? Someone was going to say it!

Who wants some popcorn while we wait for the flamewar to start?
I brought marshmallows and beer!

People with a personal relationship with God could be muslims too :)
But the thing is they call God Allah, but to me, it doesn't make any difference, as they are both kind of the same, as they created us and tell us what is best in life.
Go to a Christian church in the middle east and tell me what they call God (I'll give you a hint...it starts will "all" and ends with "ah")
and any monotheistic religion can claim a personal relationship with God...that is kinda irrelevant to the point that was being made

I am a Catholic. I love the Lord Jesus Christ and the Church He established. I nurture my spiritual life with the Sacraments of the Church, and like the wayfarer, subsist on alms from Our Mother the Church.

I'm Catholic too, HOWEVER, you do know that Jesus never intended for the Church to be institutionalized? WE are church. I recognize the the hierarchy is not the church, but only one part of the church. The people are the church. I recognize this in the Spirit of Vatican II.

I brought marshmallows and beer!


Go to a Christian church in the middle east and tell me what they call God (I'll give you a hint...it starts will "all" and ends with "ah")


No, because that wouldn't be a christian church.:rolleyes:

Btw I was just correcting him.

Go to a Christian church in the middle east and tell me what they call God (I'll give you a hint...it starts will "all" and ends with "ah")
and any monotheistic religion can claim a personal relationship with God...that is kinda irrelevant to the point that was being made

The word being used to denote a god doesn't matter. The interpretation of what that God wants is what was meant I think

No, because that wouldn't be a christian church.:rolleyes:A Christian church in the middle east wouldn't be a Christian church? Please, do explain.

Btw I was just correcting him.
RLI said

I'm not a Christian, but many Christians believe that Christianity is about a personal relationship with God rather than a formalised religion.
you said
People with a personal relationship with God could be muslims too
That is like saying "Many dogs have brown fur"
"So do many cats"
It isn't inaccurate, but it isn't exactly relevant to the point being made

I am not religious.

A Christian church in the middle east wouldn't be a Christian church? Please, do explain.


It isn't if they call God Allah.

The word being used to denote a god doesn't matter. The interpretation of what that God wants is what was meant I think
That would be my point. McCh1ck3n placed them as two different entities:But the thing is they call God Allah, but to me, it doesn't make any difference, as they are both kind of the same, as they created us and tell us what is best in life.
rather than two words in two different languages refering to one thing

It is like saying "The spanish have this thing that tells them time that they call a "reloj". It is similar to our clock"

Well, I'm sorry, I think my English isn't good enough to discuss with you guys. I did think it was enough. I better shut up or kill myself. :D

It isn't if they call God Allah.
So the French, who call God "Dieu"...they aren't Christian?
What about the Germans, who would use "Gott"?
And the Greeks, who would use "Θεός"? They aren't Christian?
Wait...what about the Italians? They use "Dio"...or the Spanish, who use "Dios"...or the Russians, who use "Бог"? Or Israelis, who would use "Adonai"?

I suppose that God can only be refered to by the English term? Guess what? A person from an Arab speaking country will use the Arabic term for God, which just happens to be Allah, same as a Frenchman will use Dieu, Italians will use Dio, and Greeks will use Θεός

I am a very religious Christian, in fact, my nation is a semi-theocracy (The majority of my nation is Christian)

When I refer to my nation, I am talking about my NationStates nation, not in RL

Well, I'm sorry, I think my English isn't good enough to discuss with you guys. I did think it was enough. I better shut up or kill myself. :D

Your English is fine. This is a debate forum...if someone disagrees with you, they will make it known. Be ready to defend your ideas with evidence.

I'm Catholic too, HOWEVER, you do know that Jesus never intended for the Church to be institutionalized? WE are church. I recognize the the hierarchy is not the church, but only one part of the church. The people are the church. I recognize this in the Spirit of Vatican II.

You realize, of course, that absolutely no pre Vatican II Church Council, no Papal Document, no doctrine of the Church...and hell, not even Vatican II agrees with you. You are a Modernist and a Heretic. Repent.

So the French, who call God "Dieu"...they aren't Christian?
What about the Germans, who would use "Gott"?
And the Greeks, who would use "Θεός"? They aren't Christian?
Wait...what about the Italians? They use "Dio"...or the Spanish, who use "Dios"...or the Russians, who use "Бог"? Or Israelis, who would use "Adonai"?

I suppose that God can only be refered to by the English term? Guess what? A person from an Arab speaking country will use the Arabic term for God, which just happens to be Allah, same as a Frenchman will use Dieu, Italians will use Dio, and Greeks will use Θεός

So tell me one thing, smartass. I live in Holland, or, the Netherlands. We call the christian god 'god'. We have a lot of muslims living in our country. And guess what, they don't call their god 'god', but they still call their god 'allah'. So that is why I believe 'god' is the word for christians and 'allah' is the word for muslims.

Iam Christian I belive in Jesus but iam not religous one bit part form going to my Churches Mens Breakfast

So that is why I believe 'god' is the word for christians and 'allah' is the word for muslims.

Accept your mistake and move on. You're going to get destroyed in this debate if you keep this up

No.

I have been destroyed in debates before, it is not that I cry out all day with it or something. I learn from mistakes :)

So tell me one thing, smartass. I live in Holland, or, the Netherlands. We call the christian god 'god'. We have a lot of muslims living in our country. And guess what, they don't call their god 'god', but they still call their god 'allah'. So that is why I believe 'god' is the word for christians and 'allah' is the word for muslims.

First off, do NOT flame me. It will not be worth your time.
Second of all, interesting that you are from the Netherlands, as Dutch and English share the same word for God. One of the few languages that does so.
Now, your experience is fine. But you ignore one thing. Christianity allows for prayers to be translated into any language. Judaism and Islam do not. Prayers must remain in Hebrew and Arabic, respectively.

You still fail to answer: Is a Frenchman praying to a different God by using the word Dieu?

Is a Spaniard still refering to a "Clock" even if he uses the word "Reloj"?

I have been destroyed in debates before, it is not that I cry out all day with it or something. I learn from mistakes :)

I very much doubt you do learn based on what i've seen so far

As I define religious, no. I am not religious. I do, however consider myelf a christian and I have faith in Christ.

That's the most ridiculous religious statement I've ever heard.
And I should know, I've offended a few.
Or a many.

Anyway, seeing as most of the time I'm an (hardcore) atheist, but I'm a pastafarian when it's convienient, I'm non-religious.

Also, mildly relevant to this topic is my recent bill to repeal "Religious Tolerance", please support.

Thanks, y'all.

You realize, of course, that absolutely no pre Vatican II Church Council, no Papal Document, no doctrine of the Church...and hell, not even Vatican II agrees with you. You are a Modernist and a Heretic. Repent.

Wait...I call you a begging cannibalistic magical zombie believer, and he's the one you reply to?

I call failure on the part of this troll.

Well, I am sorry to tell you, but I dont know if a Frenchman who says 'Dieu' calls for the christian god or the islamic god, or both. But I can tell you from my own expierience, if I say to a muslim living in our country 'I pray to god' (off course translated to 'ik bid naar god') then he would never think I would be praying to a muslim god.

But is their understanding of that God based on the religion?

You should probably ask them that, I'm not the best person to answer for obvious reasons.

I believe in God as much as I believe in a consensual reality. I do not believe that humans can accurately comprehend god, and therefore I do not believe in any of the social institutions that we call 'religions'.

I guess I'm 'other'?

Well, I am sorry to tell you, but I dont know if a Frenchman who says 'Dieu' calls for the christian god or the islamic god, or both. But I can tell you from my own expierience, if I say to a muslim living in our country 'I pray to god' (off course translated to 'ik bid naar god') then he would never think I would be praying to a muslim god.

I'll give you a hint: The Frenchman is praying to the same God as you. Actually, he probably attends the exact same church branch that you do.

And again, Muslims don't translate to other languages. Christians do. A muslim in Germany, Norway, China, Japan, England, Egypt, Holland, etc. will always use "Allah".
A Christian in Germany will use Gott. In England and Holland, God. In Egypt, Allah. In Israel, Adonai.

This is similar to saying "Gott is God". If you translate it, you get "God is God."
Allah is God. God is Allah. Translated to English, we still get "God is God". They are two words in two entirely different languages that refer to the same thing. No different than Klok and Clock, Dog and Hond.

Well, I am sorry to tell you, but I dont know if a Frenchman who says 'Dieu' calls for the christian god or the islamic god, or both. But I can tell you from my own expierience, if I say to a muslim living in our country 'I pray to god' (off course translated to 'ik bid naar god') then he would never think I would be praying to a muslim god.

I lived in France for a time, speak French fluently, and from my own experience I can tell you that the word "dieu" is exactly like the word "god" in English. It doesn't imply one deity or another. Zeus is a god. Thor is a god. Only when capitalized (God or Dieu) does it imply the Christian god.

This is similar to saying "Gott is God". If you translate it, you get "God is God.
Allah is God. God is Allah.


Well, I am very sorry, but I still believe that is not right. It is right if you say 'Allah is A(!) God.' I think you are missing one important thing; God is a person (or 'something', if you know what I mean) and on the other hand God is a figure that is above all of thing and us. Now you probably ask yourself what the difference is. If you are talking about the first god, you mean the christian god. But if you are talking about the second god, you talk about any god, the hindoïst for example have many gods, but they are not christian. I hope you understand what I mean. :(
The God in Gott (I looked it up in wikipedia) is the second translation. Therefore Allah is not God as the way you are saying.

Well, I am very sorry, but I still believe that is not right. It is right if you say 'Allah is A(!) God.' I think you are missing one important thing; God is a person (or 'something', if you know what I mean) and on the other hand God is a figure that is above all of thing and us. Now you probably ask yourself what the difference is. If you are talking about the first god, you mean the christian god. But if you are talking about the second god, you talk about any god, the hindoïst for example have many gods, but they are not christian. I hope you understand what I mean. :(
The God in Gott (I looked it up in wikipedia) is the second translation. Therefore Allah is not God as the way you are saying.

No, Allah IS God in the way I am saying. Go to a Christian Church in an Arab speaking country, and they say "Allah". Hell, go to a Coptic Church in your area, and they say Allah, yet they are still Christian. You can deny it all you want, but it is fact.
The God of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are on in the same. Each evolved out of the previous one. Each believe in the "One True God", who is omnipotent, omnipresent, and all powerful. They are exactly the same. It is a different word in a different language.
I am not talking about the hindu gods. I'm not talking about any deity except for that of the Judeo-Christo-Islamic tradition. All three share the Torah as a holy book. Islam even recongnized Jesus as a prophet. They are three religions that share the same God.
Gott is the German word for God. You can continue to deny the existance of different words for God in different languages, but you just make yourself look stupid.
Not to mention, claiming that Gott (a German word) somehow disproves Allah (an Arabic word) is pretty much a really bad logical fallacy along the lines of "My pen is black, so the sky must be too"
But if Wiki says it, it must be true. Because we all know, Wiki iz teh God!. Thou shalt not worship any above it LOLZ!

Wait...I call you a begging cannibalistic magical zombie believer, and he's the one you reply to?

You said outright that you are an atheist. Why bother?

You said outright that you are an atheist. Why bother?

Because you're supposed to, right? You're supposed to convert people to Catholicism and all that junk, right? I figured being who you are you'd at least try, or get offended and call me a blasphemer or something.

You realize, of course, that absolutely no pre Vatican II Church Council, no Papal Document, no doctrine of the Church...and hell, not even Vatican II agrees with you. You are a Modernist and a Heretic. Repent.

I was not aware that you were appointed my Bishop, or were made prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith. I love how internet traditionalists think they only have the right to determine what Catholicism is, but you rearely hear from them in the real world.

The laity are gathered together in the People of God and make up the Body of Christ under one head. From Lumen Gentium, the Dogmatic Constitution of the Church. Do you deny the dogmatic constitution?

And only God is my judge.

Atheist

I consider myself to be 'religious', though I don't follow a religion. That is to say I have extremely strong beliefs on many things, but not in a sense which is "officially" classed as a religion. So... I guess maybe I'm actually more spiritual.

As I define religious, no. I am not religious. I do, however consider myelf a christian and I have faith in Christ.



Religion is a construct of men in order to gain influence by exploiting the faithful. I know that sounds very negative, and it can be. But not always. Sometimes religion can bring communities together and accomplish great works. But it's still a construct of men and I have no faith in them. *nod*

Same here.

I consider that religious.
I don't.

Wait... despite that outside this site, the majority of people are religious, within this site the majority, at least according to the poll, isn't religious? Just what about the demographic of the forums on a political MMORPG site implies being less religious?

Wait... despite that outside this site, the majority of people are religious, within this site the majority, at least according to the poll, isn't religious? Just what about the demographic of the forums on a political MMORPG site implies being less religious?

Outside this forum or outside all forums online?

Just so everyone knows, I'd rather not have any religious debate in this thread.

What exactly do you expect the debate to be about? Tacos? Perhaps a flame war between those who floss and those who believe that flossing is in fact a conspiracy by the dental industry to control our minds?

Because if you were expecting no debate at all, aside from "yes", "no", or "other" answers, that would be one boring thread.

Oh, and for the record, no, I'm not particularly religious, as I don't see how it matters that much.

Just a poll. It's interesting to know.

Oops, forgot to put the poll part in.

Just so everyone knows, I'd rather not have any religious debate in this thread.

Yes is if you believe in a religion.
No is if you don't.
Other is for... other.

No. I'm fine with other people having their religions, but as soon as someone starts thumping their holy book, I don't like that.

Wait... despite that outside this site, the majority of people are religious, within this site the majority, at least according to the poll, isn't religious? Just what about the demographic of the forums on a political MMORPG site implies being less religious?

We also tend to have more liberals than conservatives. IMS.

What exactly do you expect the debate to be about? Tacos? Perhaps a flame war between those who floss and those who believe that flossing is in fact a conspiracy by the dental industry to control our minds?

Because if you were expecting no debate at all, aside from "yes", "no", or "other" answers, that would be one boring thread.

Oh, and for the record, no, I'm not particularly religious, as I don't see how it matters that much.

I don't want a debate about whether one religion or another is better than or more true than another. For instance, how the thread is going so far is fine with me.

No. I'm fine with other people having their religions, but as soon as someone starts thumping their holy book, I don't like that.

Same here.

We also tend to have more liberals than conservatives. IMS.
Just how much meaning do those terms have, when they associate opinions on WAY too many different issues with each other to make sense? And even if we aren't to look at religion in itself, what issue are you suggesting that NS would attract a more "liberal" demographic with regards to so as for there to be an apparent reversal of popular opinion? (Well, at least in terms of this specific subject...)

And what's IMS mean?

As I define religious, no. I am not religious. I do, however consider myelf a christian and I have faith in Christ.

Same here man.

And only God is my judge.

Unam Sanctam...read it.

Unam Sanctam...read it.

Why are you so demanding, my friend! Rejoice for Jesus came to save us!

It seems as though you ignored my quote from the Dogmatic Constitution of the Church.

God bless you!

What the hell is other?

It seems as though you ignored my quote from the Dogmatic Constitution of the Church.

It was taken out of context.

God bless you!

Urged by faith, we are obliged to believe and to maintain that the Church is one, holy, catholic, and also apostolic. We believe in her firmly and we confess with simplicity that outside of her there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins, as the Spouse in the Canticles [Sgs 6:8] proclaims: 'One is my dove, my perfect one. She is the only one, the chosen of her who bore her,' and she represents one sole mystical body whose Head is Christ and the head of Christ is God [1 Cor 11:3]. In her then is one Lord, one faith, one baptism [Eph 4:5]. There had been at the time of the deluge only one ark of Noah, prefiguring the one Church, which ark, having been finished to a single cubit, had only one pilot and guide, i.e., Noah, and we read that, outside of this ark, all that subsisted on the earth was destroyed.

We venerate this Church as one, the Lord having said by the mouth of the prophet: 'Deliver, O God, my soul from the sword and my only one from the hand of the dog.' [Ps 21:20] He has prayed for his soul, that is for himself, heart and body; and this body, that is to say, the Church, He has called one because of the unity of the Spouse, of the faith, of the sacraments, and of the charity of the Church. This is the tunic of the Lord, the seamless tunic, which was not rent but which was cast by lot [Jn 19:23-24]. Therefore, of the one and only Church there is one body and one head, not two heads like a monster; that is, Christ and the Vicar of Christ, Peter and the successor of Peter, since the Lord speaking to Peter Himself said: 'Feed my sheep' [Jn 21:17], meaning, my sheep in general, not these, nor those in particular, whence we understand that He entrusted all to him [Peter]. Therefore, if the Greeks or others should say that they are not confided to Peter and to his successors, they must confess not being the sheep of Christ, since Our Lord says in John 'there is one sheepfold and one shepherd.' We are informed by the texts of the gospels that in this Church and in its power are two swords; namely, the spiritual and the temporal. For when the Apostles say: 'Behold, here are two swords' [Lk 22:38] that is to say, in the Church, since the Apostles were speaking, the Lord did not reply that there were too many, but sufficient. Certainly the one who denies that the temporal sword is in the power of Peter has not listened well to the word of the Lord commanding: 'Put up thy sword into thy scabbard' [Mt 26:52]. Both, therefore, are in the power of the Church, that is to say, the spiritual and the material sword, but the former is to be administered _for_ the Church but the latter by the Church; the former in the hands of the priest; the latter by the hands of kings and soldiers, but at the will and sufferance of the priest.

However, one sword ought to be subordinated to the other and temporal authority, subjected to spiritual power. For since the Apostle said: 'There is no power except from God and the things that are, are ordained of God' [Rom 13:1-2], but they would not be ordained if one sword were not subordinated to the other and if the inferior one, as it were, were not led upwards by the other.

For, according to the Blessed Dionysius, it is a law of the divinity that the lowest things reach the highest place by intermediaries. Then, according to the order of the universe, all things are not led back to order equally and immediately, but the lowest by the intermediary, and the inferior by the superior. Hence we must recognize the more clearly that spiritual power surpasses in dignity and in nobility any temporal power whatever, as spiritual things surpass the temporal. This we see very clearly also by the payment, benediction, and consecration of the tithes, but the acceptance of power itself and by the government even of things. For with truth as our witness, it belongs to spiritual power to establish the terrestrial power and to pass judgement if it has not been good. Thus is accomplished the prophecy of Jeremias concerning the Church and the ecclesiastical power: 'Behold to-day I have placed you over nations, and over kingdoms' and the rest. Therefore, if the terrestrial power err, it will be judged by the spiritual power; but if a minor spiritual power err, it will be judged by a superior spiritual power; but if the highest power of all err, it can be judged only by God, and not by man, according to the testimony of the Apostle: 'The spiritual man judgeth of all things and he himself is judged by no man' [1 Cor 2:15]. This authority, however, (though it has been given to man and is exercised by man), is not human but rather divine, granted to Peter by a divine word and reaffirmed to him (Peter) and his successors by the One Whom Peter confessed, the Lord saying to Peter himself, 'Whatsoever you shall bind on earth, shall be bound also in Heaven' etc., [Mt 16:19]. Therefore whoever resists this power thus ordained by God, resists the ordinance of God [Rom 13:2], unless he invent like Manicheus two beginnings, which is false and judged by us heretical, since according to the testimony of Moses, it is not in the beginnings but in the beginning that God created heaven and earth [Gen 1:1]. Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.

What the hell is other?

Cults?

It was taken out of context.

No, it was not. It specifically says the people are the Body of Christ.

Unam Sanctam was written before Protestantism emerged. And what of the Eastern Orthodox catholics? Can they not be saved?

Nostra Aetate, Declaration on Non-Christian religions:
http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html

Outside this forum or outside all forums online?
I guess I didn't word that right, I meant that the majority, not within any forum or even necessarily the Internet, claim to be religious, whereas the majority here claim not to be. Right now my guess is that because a political MMORPG is fairly "worldly" entertainment, it would attract people who would be less likely to follow religion (I've seen comparisons made on this site like "then god is a tyrant" etc..) but I didn't think that alone would repel religious people strongly enough to reverse popular opinion about it...