What makes a saint?

[Master Clockfish]

Bellabie

Perhaps the truest selflessness is of a child never born. They have taken nothing and given life.
b

That sounded kind of morbid if you think about it.  

[Bellabie]

I suppose so. I mean, quite literally, they are without self, but I understand that it is morbid. This would provoke people to commit suicide or homicide, if this were so.
"Save through death"
and so on.
b  

[Dameon the -V-]

Wow went from saint qualities to un-born children this thread is going on un-treaded earth...

Well dieing in the sake of someone is the ultimate sacrifice but usually there was a purpose to it...I mean commiting suicide to teach someone a lesson is not self-less

well you cant be completely self-less
you have to be a little self-ish to survive (food, water....)  

[Bellabie]

"To survive," yes. This is why I cited an unborn child.
b  

[Mileena Chardonnay]

Perhaps it's easier to say what ISN'T a saint. So, what qualifies as a sinner?  

[scintillio]

Bellabie

I don't think that it is impossible for someone to be selfless. It would be rather unlikely. Perhaps the truest selflessness is of a child never born. They have taken nothing and given life.
b

sweatdrop um, why cant it be a baby? ;3; Babies are the most innocent thing in the world, i believe....  

[Anochaa]

I was here...

Czarinas Knife

sweatdrop um, why cant it be a baby? ; Babies are the most innocent thing in the world, i believe....

Innocent, perhaps, but they are in no way selfless. Have you ever been around a baby? They're the most selfish things ever. They just want attention, food, new diapers, etc. constantly. They also don't have a developed sense of compassion or anything (they have a primative one - there was a study where babies listened to recordings of crying and they cried when they heard a different babie's cry, showing sympathetic reactions, and ignored their own, thus showing that they have both a general sense of self and sympathy, but nothing fully developed.) and therefore are unable to be "selfless."

As far as innocence goes...well, that's all relative, isn't it?

...and then I was gone.

 

[scintillio]

Anochaa

I was here...

Czarinas Knife

sweatdrop um, why cant it be a baby? ; Babies are the most innocent thing in the world, i believe....

Innocent, perhaps, but they are in no way selfless. Have you ever been around a baby? They're the most selfish things ever. They just want attention, food, new diapers, etc. constantly. They also don't have a developed sense of compassion or anything (they have a primative one - there was a study where babies listened to recordings of crying and they cried when they heard a different babie's cry, showing sympathetic reactions, and ignored their own, thus showing that they have both a general sense of self and sympathy, but nothing fully developed.) and therefore are unable to be "selfless."

As far as innocence goes...well, that's all relative, isn't it?

...and then I was gone.

isnt that all just a way to survive---i mean thats an animals basic instinct, is it not?

Fine, babies are selfish. yes, ive seen it, but it only gets worse. From a babie to the point you become fully grown, your probably 100% more selfish than you were when you were a child.

Innocence, to me, is not being acountable for your actions. How can a babie, an infant, be accountable for crying when hungry? or calling for attention?

Besides, when you get older, yea, you know and might have compassion and caring and the like---but do we always use it? Nope. Having it doesnt mean your more innocent, and not having it doesnt mean you arent.

So how are we capable of selflessness? If babies just have primitave compassion, and we can ignore ours, then selflessness is unatinable, because the focus will eventually, shift to us.  

[Bellabie]

Ah, my dear Czarina, you must understand. Although I agree with many of your points, the question posed called for selflessness and babies do not exhibit that.

Master Nightshade, I think that there are far too many possibilities, here. Much like the contained infinity that is definition, I fear an antonym would lead us far off course.

b  

[scintillio]

Bellabie

Ah, my dear Czarina, you must understand. Although I agree with many of your points, the question posed called for selflessness and babies do not exhibit that.

b

;3; only cause they really cant express themselves xd  

[Mileena Chardonnay]

On the contrary, babies can exhibit basic emotion. Joy, Anger, Fear, Disgust, Interest, Surprise, and Envy are all available to them. Furthermore, they do have a limited set of gestures and sonic cues to express wants and needs. They can express themselves, just at a limited capacity.  

[Dameon the -V-]

Well with a limited amount of verbal and physicals cue's we cant really blame them for being frustrated. If all I could do was scream and throw my arms about to tell you "I want food!" I would be really pissed as well....

oh well that was kind of random

@bella
I do not agree with you on the un-born child being self-less. They still ingest food and often even kick the mother's stomach, This is a lesser degree of selfless-ness but its still a tad-bit selfish

@mobius
Well do be considered a sinner we would have to establish a religion we would be basing it off of, The alqadae believe they will go to heaven and be greeted by numerous virgins. Christianity believes if you defy god then you are a sinner and if you go against the ten commandments.
Mormons = dameon at a loss for things on them...

First we have to establish a base is all im saying (I guess)  

[Bellabie]

Ah, but, dear Dameon, the child unborn doesn't necessarily mean that it developed. Anyhow, this conversation is leading to the point at which many do and that is this:
Are their souls?
b  

[Dameon the -V-]

whoa that was totally random why are you gunning for that?

there is no solid proof of anything on that matter, Truely I do not care if I have a soul or not. Im going to die, its inevitable, so why worry yourself with if your damned or not?
Live out whats left of your life...  

[Bellabie]

Gunning? Hm?

Random? No. If the unborn child is one never conceived, scientifically, it would not exist. If there are souls, however, this child is the purest of essence.

I disagree, your description seems to say do whatever you wish despite the possibility of consequences. I believe that there are souls, to an extent, and that they last infinitely long. Their time in this world is brief.
I think that you ought to do whatever you think is best for yourself and all of the others.
b