Understanding Christianity [Archive]

Artorius Maximus

03-19-2008, 06:53

What is Christianity?

"Christianity is just another one of many religions. They all teach people to live a good life."

"Christianity simply gives people a high standard of morals to try to follow."

"Christianity means going to church occasionally and being good to your neighbors."

Are any of these ideas about Christianity true? No! Though held by many people, each of these thoughts are wrong. Christianity is not just one among many religions. Nor does it simply call for a person to be good and attend church.

Christianity stands unique among all the world’s religious systems because it’s founder, Jesus Christ, is the Son of God. He came to Earth to reveal God to us in human form. This is true of no other religion. Jesus Christ is not simply another human being. He is God!

Therefore salvation (release) from the guilt of sin is possible only through Him. He said, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me" (John 14:6). "Salvation is found in no one else" (Acts 4:12).

A Christian is not someone who simply attends church, tries to be good on his own, or attempts to build up merit before God. Rituals and good deeds will not make you a Christian; you need a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. And this is possible only when you admit that you are a sinner and you turn to Him for forgiveness of your sins. That is why Jesus died on the cross; to bear your sins so that you can receive Him as your Savior. When you do, He will forgive you and give you eternal life. Then as a child of God, you can have fellowship with Jesus Christ in prayer, and you can depend upon Him for help each day. This is what Christianity is all about; salvation from sin and a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

Will you trust Jesus Christ now as your personal savior? If you will do so, you will receive God’s free gift of eternal life and forgiveness of your sins. Turn to Him now in faith, realizing you can do nothing to save yourself. To become a Christian, pray a prayer something like this:

God, I confess that I am a sinner, and I realize I can’t save myself. So I ask Jesus to save me from my sin by forgiving me and giving me the wonderful gift of eternal life. I trust Him now as my Savior. Amen.

"What is Christianity" is actually from Dr. Roy B. Zuck, and the original tract can be found here: http://www.atstracts.org/readarticle.php?id=46

P.S. Please forgive me if I put this in the wrong subforum.

seireikhaan

03-19-2008, 07:42

Hmm, now this would've garnered some very, uh, 'interesting' responses if it had been posted in the backroom. :wink:

Edit: I'm gonna take a swipe at this and guess you're a Lutheran, perhaps?

Decker

03-19-2008, 08:22

Mr.Lucius Julius... I feel like I just re-read my high school's mission statement and also what they had told me, and the rest of the student body:inquisitive:. They way it reminds me, is that they really pushed the Christ, in Christian and Christianity into you and your opst seemed eerily familiar. To me, it was nice to learn more about Christ, his dad (or God), and all that other fun stuff, but then I am, and many others, are told that the other roads lead to hell (seriously, they told us up front quite a few times). To me this(and only to me as I cannot speak for others on any large level), sounds like blah blah blah, saved or to hell, blah blah. And this is how I understand it.

I'm "Christian" but born Lutheran. It's under the umbrella of Christianity, but I find that the ones that actually call themselves "Christians" seem to have this sense of, "I'm better than you" type attitud, no offense to you or any other Christians on this forum. But, after going to a Christian school for 7-years, this seemed to have been an underlying theme and it really bugged, me and in some ways, has many people dislike it or turn away.

That's just how I perceive it all.

Gaius Scribonius Curio

03-19-2008, 08:53

I don't want to say too much as I don't wish to:

a) come under too much censure from others

and more importantly

b) diminish other peoples beliefs in any way shape or form.

I'll start by saying that I have been raised (loosely) a Catholic. My parents instilled in me christian values, respect others, try to help others, don't be selfish etc. I also attended a Catholic school for the final 2 and a half years of high school.

I am an Atheist, I make no secret of it, I've read extensively about religion, spirituality and know more biblical quotes and religious phrases than the average christian, I've come to my own conclusions and don't wish to force others to it, they can decide for themselves.

Strangely enough, while the (compulsory) Religious studies course was mundane and boring, the teachers never pushed the whole, If you don't do as we say you're going down the wrong path, message, although they did express disapproval at some of our activities. Also my religion teacher, (actually the head of Sport and a devout Catholic) encouraged a lot of debate, and in the end, just before I graduated said that I pretty much was a christian due to my values and bearing and attitude and that he hoped that eventually I'd return to the fold.

However the emphasis was on God, and a personal relationship with all three aspects of God. God himself, His son, Jesus Christ, and the holy spirit, not merely through Jesus. Of course its all down to personal belief.

Unfortunately for you Lucius Julius, there are so many different books in the Bible, all written by different people with slightly varying ideas, that you can find passages to support just about every different sect of Christianity in existance. And they're all right in what they say.

I have to cut short here, as I'm needed elsewhere, but I'd just like to reiterate that I don't intend to offend anyone. This message is entirely my opinion.

Curio

EDIT: I'm also not sure if a thread to do with religion should be located in the frontroom (its a fairly inflammatory topic and might be better in the backroom, even though I can't post there... sigh)

Pannonian

03-19-2008, 09:49

Gordon Bennett LJ, does God give you a bonus for every person you sign up or something? Post this in the Backroom instead, and I'm sure Navaros will have some interesting conversations with you.

Big_John

03-19-2008, 10:15

but I find that the ones that actually call themselves "Christians" seem to have this sense of, "I'm better than you" type attitudshoot, that pretty much describes most of the people i went to school with, regardless of affiliations.. teenagers suck.

Zim

03-19-2008, 10:18

If you don't mind my asking, what country do you live in? I'm in the U.S. and my experience has generally been that people who refer to themselves specifically by denomination rather than as just Christians are more likely to have that attitude.

I'm "Christian" but born Lutheran. It's under the umbrella of Christianity, but I find that the ones that actually call themselves "Christians" seem to have this sense of, "I'm better than you" type attitud, no offense to you or any other Christians on this forum. But, after going to a Christian school for 7-years, this seemed to have been an underlying theme and it really bugged, me and in some ways, has many people dislike it or turn away.

That's just how I perceive it all.

I've actually heard preachers use the "storing up treasure in heaven" line to convince people to prosyletize :clown:

Gordon Bennett LJ, does God give you a bonus for every person you sign up or something? Post this in the Backroom instead, and I'm sure Navaros will have some interesting conversations with you.

CountArach

03-19-2008, 11:54

To the Backroom with thee!

PS - Televangelism is one thing, but I have never heard of forumvangelism.

Beirut

03-19-2008, 12:02

To the Backroom and awayyyyyyyyyy!

Ronin

03-19-2008, 12:19

if that´s what you believe that´s fine and dandy.

for yourself...that is....

as long as you don´t come knocking on my door or telling me what I can´t do/watch/say/write, what laws I have to follow or how my kids should be taught we should get along splendidly..

Have a good one! ~:wave:

Puzz3D

03-19-2008, 12:21

Jesus Christ never claimed to be God. The biblical passages where he is supposedly quoted as saying that are interpolations. He also never intended to establish a new religion. He intended to fulfill the prophesies of the reuniting of the twelve tribes of Israel and their elevation to world domination (referred to as the coming of the Kingdom of Heaven) by the intervention of God.

naut

03-19-2008, 13:45

To the Backroom and awayyyyyyyyyy!
I was expecting something along the lines of: And He said there shall be Backroom!

I got to say that you expressed some ideas that are not often stressed to greatly by "Christians". I find that people who call themselves "Christian" often focus on punishment, good deeds, etcetera, and forget plenty of other stuff.

what laws I have to follow
Good point, also "Christians" focus and create false laws. Like don't drink alcohol (LOL! Jesus was a party animal!). Most of the "laws", are actually just guidelines to protect yourself.

Anyway before I bore y'all and myself I'll be quiet. And I can't really be bothered, since people are so endemically repulsed by religion, (due to ingrained falsehoods, created by centuries old corrupt "Church" system), no one really wants to hear about it anyway.

Viking

03-19-2008, 13:46

Ah, I was raised protestant Christian. When my parents said something, it had of course to be true. As I grew up, my understanding of Christianity and religions in general increased and....I became an atheist. :sunny:

KukriKhan

03-19-2008, 14:03

Welcome to the Backroom Lucius Julius. ~:wave:

The fellows back here can seem a bit rough at times, but I assure you that they mean well. With precision and insight, they will challange and examine any issue you bring up, including (in this case) religion.

Lads, meet Lucius Julius, new guy back here. He wants to know what you think about his brand of christianity.

Vladimir

03-19-2008, 14:22

ICantSpellDawg

03-19-2008, 14:34

Sounds like www.wayofthemaster.com

Kaidonni

03-19-2008, 15:40

Ah, Lucius Julius...I recall you from Total War Centre. You won't recognise me, because I'm not signed in most of the time there (haven't been signed in for yonks - can't be bothered to dig up my old password). You've decided to make the Backroom here...more fun? 'tis never like TWC, I'll admit that (it always seems like a drunken brawl in the debate threads there...or a brawl...).

EDIT: Vladimir, this being Total Backroom, there's bound to be a few bugs. I find it particularly annoying when the AI - sorry, LJ - installs arguments you don't need and make no sense. Then it installs them on drives you don't want them on, and gives you no other options...

Then there's the Being Defeated By Logic and Stating Scripture elements of the LJ, unfortunately separate. One turn we will come up with a sound argument to debunk something in the Bible, thus ending a section of the debate - and next turn the LJ will attack us with the same scripture, stating it as the truth just because it is written down in a specific book. It should be fixed in Total Logicroom, the next game in the series, but that remains to be seen.

EDIT 2: Hey, LJ, how are those few chariot wheels at the bottom of the Red Sea doing? They proven any other part of the Bible yet?

EDIT 3: Failing all of this... All Hallowed are the Ori! :D

Geoffrey S

03-19-2008, 16:44

P.S. Please forgive me if I put this in the wrong subforum.
Kind of ironic, given the rest of the post. :beam:

atheotes

03-19-2008, 17:52

seireikhaan

03-19-2008, 18:09

:inquisitive:

Now where's Adrian...?

Adrian II

03-19-2008, 18:25

:inquisitive:

Now where's Adrian...?Y'all know that I was raised a Pastafarian. Later in life I began to question the dogmas and precepts. These days I am an agnostic. Yes, sir.

One satisfied agnostic. :yes:

Goofball

03-19-2008, 18:42

Christianity stands unique among all the world’s religious systems because it’s founder, Jesus Christ, is the Son of God. He came to Earth to reveal God to us in human form. This is true of no other religion. Jesus Christ is not simply another human being. He is God!

My religion's penis is bigger than your religion's penis?

HoreTore

03-19-2008, 19:04

If you will do so, you will receive God’s free gift of eternal life and forgiveness of your sins.[/B]

I have no need for eternal life, and I can perfectly well seek forgiveness for my sins from the ones I have treated badly - I have no need for anyone else, so no, sorry, no salvation today.

Decker

03-19-2008, 19:05

:whip:
I've actually heard preachers use the "storing up treasure in heaven" line to convince people to prosyletize :clown:
Really... well I haven't gone to my church in like... I dunno 4 years after our best pastor left for a larger church in New York. Recently we had a new pastor who was actually our pastor with the guy I just mentioned, literally :daisy: **** up! He put so much pressure on my mom who worked at an after school program that's renting space next to the church, that she quite. He even went as far as to tell a friend of my mom's, that, "if you are not with me you are not with God.":inquisitive: He even said we had a ghost in the church and claimed to have "expelled" it:yes:. Then he tried to forcefully take over the school and found out that they didn't like him so he left and is now currently stirring **** up at another church:whip:

shoot, that pretty much describes most of the people i went to school with, regardless of affiliations.. teenagers suck.
Yea basically. I went to a Christian school and actually the faculty had that sense which was stronger than most students I knew, except for this one douchebag. Anyways, the most rediculous thing they told us was, on a chapel day (basically church in the middle of the week), the math teacher was up talking about how "baaaaaad" Halloween is. Now, I was nodding off and then he uttered the infomous line..."if you take part in Halloween you are going to HELLLL:eyebrows:!!!! We me and some friends looked at each other and said, "whups too late, guess I'm going to hell.":yes:.

And to better understand Christianity...(yes this really happened), one must find how God, Jesus Christ, ect., is found in Math, your science project and other assorted things. Had to write a 2-page paper full of A+ bs material:medievalcheers: to answer that question.

Vladimir

03-19-2008, 19:08

I've actually heard preachers use the "storing up treasure in heaven" line to convince people to prosyletize :clown:

Once when I was very young, I misunderstood what they meant and prayed for gold from heaven. :shame:

Kaidonni

03-19-2008, 21:51

My religion's penis is bigger than your religion's penis?

Well said. I was thinking of telling Lucius Julius that there are other religions where a deitie's son has visited Earth - Mohammed, for example, in Islam. Of course, there are some very colourful stories in Hinduism...chopping the head off your own son, and having to replace it with an elephant's head? Man, they are thinking outside of the box. And...turning water into wine? Didn't Jesus understand that people need to be hydrated? Wine doesn't do a particularly good job of that, and in the day...

If someone turns water into wine for me, I'll throw it over them and tell them not to ruin my cup of tea next time. :laugh4:

Geoffrey S

03-19-2008, 22:31

Uh. Since when is Mohammed the son of God?

Kaidonni

03-19-2008, 22:33

He was one of Allah's sons, right? Correct me if I'm wrong, of course. Still, there are more colourful tales than Christianity...come on people, an elephant's head on a kid! How cool is that? ;)

drone

03-19-2008, 22:50

Mohammed was a prophet, not a child of Allah.

Adrian II

03-19-2008, 22:54

...come on people, an elephant's head on a kid! How cool is that? ;):laugh4:

Mohammed was visited by the Archangel Gabriel though. Not bad for an upstart.

TB666

03-19-2008, 23:41

Oh *sigh* Lucius Julius, not here as well.

He wants to know what you think about his brand of christianity.No he doesn't.
He is trying to convert people.
He is kinda of a laughing stock over at TWC for it and not very popular since he pretty much do hit and runs.
Posts a thread filled with misinformation copy-pasted from some christian/creationist website trying to convert people and then is never seen again until a few days later when another thread pops up with the same type of message and leaves again.
Once we did get him to reply to a discussion he created and his response was pretty much "you are all blind therefore no point in discussing with you".

Anyway, LJ, what's the website where you copied this from ??

Navaros

03-20-2008, 00:10

Original post doesn't have any misinformation in it.

TB666

03-20-2008, 00:39

Jesus Christ, is the Son of God

He is God!
Misinformation right there.
Atleast keep the stories straight.
Being the son of god while being the god himself is just well sick.
Like something out of "Deliverance".
Unless Jesus is one god and "god" is another which makes christianity a polytheism. Of course with the trinity factor christianity is already one so I guess that just another deity to the tree.

He will forgive you and give you eternal life
Until you die of disease, old age or shot by some random drug addict etc
Reminds me of South Park.
"having sex with children had made him immortal so he lived for an eternity until he got hit by a train"

Then as a child of God
So that's why you don't get eternal life. Jesus gets jealous.
Common problem among first born

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son
Is the one and only son us or Jesus ??
Make up your mind.

Because He offers us the gift of eternal life freely
Now that is just plain wrong.
If he offered it freely you wouldn't have to worship him or submit yourself to him or even depend on him.
That's like giving away free samples of food as long as you pay for it.

the wonderful gift of eternal life
Sorry but there is nothing wonderful about an eternal life.
It's a curse, not a gift.

Ronin

03-20-2008, 00:45

Original post doesn't have any misinformation in it.

you are a lot of fun too Navaros....don´t worry the new guy won´t make us forget about you

Navaros might be feeling a bit threatened in his position here guys....let´s make sure we make him feel he is still important... ~:grouphug:

I´ll still laugh at your posts first Navaros...this new guy won´t take your place don´t worry.

Pannonian

03-20-2008, 00:46

Original post doesn't have any misinformation in it.
I thought you thought that Jesus was a bleeding heart good for nothing liberal? What's happened to your religious rigour man? I used to admire the way you stood up against these newfangled wishy washy cults, and how you preached hell and brimstone old testament. What's happened to the old Navaros? Has he mellowed?

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

03-20-2008, 01:53

Ah, Evangelical Christianity, potentially so small and self centred.

A relationship with Jesus Christ? How about a relationship with GOD?

Ooooh, I don't know which to choose.

I'm sorry but if you are going to try and convert people at least come with your own ideas, not what your "Preacher" has told you. Go away, read the Bible and then come back and try and convert other people. If your faith can withstand the glaring condradictions in the Holy Press Pack I'll take you seriously.

Personnally, I'm of the opinion that seeking Eternal life is a garrenteed way not to get it.

KukriKhan

03-20-2008, 02:07

Oh *sigh* Lucius Julius, not here as well.

No he doesn't.
He is trying to convert people.
He is kinda of a laughing stock over at TWC for it and not very popular since he pretty much do hit and runs.
Posts a thread filled with misinformation copy-pasted from some christian/creationist website trying to convert people and then is never seen again until a few days later when another thread pops up with the same type of message and leaves again.
Once we did get him to reply to a discussion he created and his response was pretty much "you are all blind therefore no point in discussing with you".

Anyway, LJ, what's the website where you copied this from ??

We don't 'do' laughingstocks' here. Everyone gets to have his/her say, with respectful consideration shown.

On the other hand, we also don't 'do' unattributed, un-linked copy/pastes either. We see that as cheating, a padding of one's own views by employing an unidentified 'ringer'; that ringer's words masquerading as one's own.

Thread is temporarily closed, pending staff inquiry.

Thanks for all contributions thus far. :bow:

KukriKhan

03-20-2008, 13:02

-Update-

Thread is re-opened. New Member Lucius Julius did not have access to the backroom previously, and thus could not respond. He will be granted access soon, and has been advised of the rules we operate under here.

For clarity: the opening post contains material originally written by Roy B. Zuch, and is viewable on the web HERE (http://www.atstracts.org/readarticle.php?id=46).

Husar

03-20-2008, 13:44

This is the only right version of christianity for the record!

Seriously, it's pretty much what I have been raised with, not so sure about it anymore as some may know, but it sounds very known to me, which in turn is kinda scary because it always sounds the same. :stupido2:

I do however think that some of you could be a bit nicer anyway, believe it or not but there's no reason to ridicule him, I don't think he had any evil intentions.

TB666

03-20-2008, 14:44

We don't 'do' laughingstocks' here. Everyone gets to have his/her say, with respectful consideration shown.

Well we don't do that at TWC either.
Just certain members who do the same thing over and over again over time become one.

For clarity: the opening post contains material originally written by Roy B. Zuch, and is viewable on the web HERE.
Still hasn't learned. :shame:

Do note that I'm not bashing LJ or his beliefs.
I respect him and his beliefs as I suggests others to do as well.
He is overall a friendly poster that unlike other's like him doesn't flame other people.
However I do ask that he respects others people's religion(and athiests) and in some cases their sexual preference(I'm pretty sure there is some homosexuals on this forum) which I know he doesn't.

Adrian II

03-20-2008, 16:52

If he offered eternal life freely you wouldn't have to worship him or submit yourself to him or even depend on him. That's like giving away free samples of food as long as you pay for it.:laugh4:

ICantSpellDawg

03-20-2008, 16:55

(I'm pretty sure there is some homosexuals on this forum) which I know he doesn't.

I think that there is 1 in the backroom.

Artorius Maximus

03-20-2008, 17:31

Anyway, LJ, what's the website where you copied this from ??

I didn't copy this from a website, I had "What is Christianity" in real life, while typing it here. But the website is this: http://www.atstracts.org/readarticle.php?id=46

A Moderator just told me about that website.

A relationship with Jesus Christ? How about a relationship with GOD?

God and Jesus are one and the same under the Trinity.

drone

03-20-2008, 17:41

The Holy Spirit never gets any love. The red-headed stepchild of the Trinity. :yes:

TB666

03-20-2008, 17:55

I didn't copy this from a website, I had "What is Christianity" in real life, while typing it here. But the website is this: http://www.atstracts.org/readarticle.php?id=46

A Moderator just told me about that website.

Which is exactly like what you typed hence copied and if you copy then you must provide a source. It's the common form. If it's a book then name the author and book. If it's a movie then state the movie etc.
Trying to pass off things as your own is dishonest and I'm pretty sure the bible goes against that.

God and Jesus are one and the same under the Trinity.
Is that a banjo I hear playing in the background ??

Vladimir

03-20-2008, 21:48

Is that a banjo I hear playing in the background ??

:inquisitive: Says the Viking.

911 AD, never forget (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/911)!

Adrian II

03-20-2008, 21:53

Is that a banjo I hear playing in the background ??:laugh4: :laugh4: Man, TB666, you are lethal!

Samurai Waki

03-20-2008, 22:02

Being raised Catholic... well... I'm pretty much with the rest of the atheists... I just don't care anymore...

TB666

03-20-2008, 22:09

911 AD, never forget (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/911)!
What exactly am I looking for here ??

Kekvit Irae

03-20-2008, 22:16

Vladimir

03-21-2008, 00:11

So, death to the infidel it is? :inquisitive: If you like Democrats you should love Catholics.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

03-21-2008, 00:57

God and Jesus are one and the same under the Trinity.

Yes, they are, but you run the risk of seperating them by focusing on the Jesus of the Gospels far too much. Those biographies were written about the man he may have been the God Incarnate but that was not how he manifested.

Although, the Holy Trinity isn't actually in the Bible at all, though.

Big_John

03-21-2008, 01:53

All hail Lord Xenu!"give us all your money or we will sue and possibly kill you"

-scientology, the most honest religion.

Evil_Maniac From Mars

03-21-2008, 02:09

Honestly, I can't respect any religion that allows one to murder, rape, steal, and be a Republican all their lives and still be forgiven with two minutes of confession and still go to Heaven (Catholic)

You have to regret it, you have to actually feel sorrow and proportionate regret for what you did for it to really count with God.

Kekvit Irae

03-21-2008, 06:11

You have to regret it, you have to actually feel sorrow and proportionate regret for what you did for it to really count with God.

Even so, there are some acts of violence that should never be forgiven, in my opinion.

Big_John

03-21-2008, 06:29

Even so, there are some acts of violence that should never be forgiven, in my opinion.i'd be more troubled by the people that could live completely good lives but still end up in eternal torture because they believed in the wrong gods.

CountArach

03-21-2008, 07:07

Artorius Maximus

03-21-2008, 08:08

Is that a banjo I hear playing in the background ??

Nah, I prefer mandolins. :beam:

This is what they are: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandolin

Sorry to go off topic, but wanted to clear that with you.

This is the only right version of christianity for the record!

Seriously, it's pretty much what I have been raised with, not so sure about it anymore as some may know, but it sounds very known to me, which in turn is kinda scary because it always sounds the same.

I do however think that some of you could be a bit nicer anyway, believe it or not but there's no reason to ridicule him, I don't think he had any evil intentions.

I have a question, Husar, do you truly believe? Your post suggests that you are Christian.

Don Corleone

03-21-2008, 11:53

Honestly, I can't respect any religion that allows one to murder, rape, steal, and be a Republican all their lives and still be forgiven with two minutes of confession and still go to Heaven (Catholic), nor can I respect a religion that completely ignores a person's good deeds in favor of a five second proclamation of accepting Jesus Christ as their savior (Protestant).

All hail Lord Xenu!

Just to set the record straight... Confession isn't a "Get out of jail free" card. If anything, it was psychotherapy for the masses, centuries before it ever beame vogue in the secular world.

When you go to confession, strictly speaking, the priest isn't actually 'doing' anything. He doesn't forgive you. He acts as a witness, to acknowledge that God has forgiven you. People frequently say "Well, I don't need a middle man, I can just confess to God". There's a psychological barrier to confessing your sins to another human being. Laying in bed one night, looking at the ceiling, and saying "Geez God, I'm kinda sorry" is a world away from sitting down and telling somebody exactly what a wretch you can be sometimes.

But it's very cathartic. Because it's so hard, you get a lot more out of it. Thinking of God as an actual person you have to have a personal discussion with about your sins is incredibly difficult, but it also helps get some perspective.

And before you start thinking "Well, I just show up and say what I've done and I'm home free", I have some bad news. It doesn't work that way. Priests don't grant absolution in an absolute sense. The forgiveness is predicated on your sincere remorse. Only you and God know for certain whether you truly repent for your sins and therefore only the two of you will ever know for certain that you were truly absolved. The priest usually says something to the affect of "In so much as you are truley remorseful, the Lord in His infinite mercy and kindess forgives you".

In other words, if you're not sorry, don't waste your time or God's saying you are.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

03-21-2008, 12:51

Isn't Catholic Confession a sacrament though, which it isn't in Anglicanism?

(Anglicans still have Cofession though.)

Banquo's Ghost

03-21-2008, 13:43

Isn't Catholic Confession a sacrament though, which it isn't in Anglicanism?

Yes it is, and described these days as the sacrament of reconciliation - which for once, is more descriptive of the idea than the old name.

I still prefer being shriven though. :beam:

Husar

03-21-2008, 14:13

I have a question, Husar, do you truly believe? Your post suggests that you are Christian.
I think I'm drifting hard towards agnosticism for many reasons I don't want to lay out here. I did believe before but it's become harder and harder for me. :shrug:

ICantSpellDawg

03-21-2008, 14:28

I am drifting back towards Roman Catholicism. I still don't believe in a God, but I've decided to fake it until I do.

Pannonian

03-21-2008, 15:22

Vladimir

03-21-2008, 17:18

Sounds painful. Do you need to go to the hospital after being shriven?

I believe it's performed in a hospital, and that they use a local anesthetic.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

03-21-2008, 17:46

Yes it is, and described these days as the sacrament of reconciliation - which for once, is more descriptive of the idea than the old name.

I still prefer being shriven though. :beam:

So how does that square with what Don said? Isn't the participation of the Priest essential in order to administer the sacrament, in which case you can't be forgiven without his blessing?

Sorry, I have trouble getting my head around Confession.

ICantSpellDawg

03-21-2008, 18:25

So how does that square with what Don said? Isn't the participation the Priest essential in oder to administer the sacrament, in which case you can't be forgiven without his blessing?

Sorry, I have trouble getting my head around Confession.

The Roman Catholic faith is a faith of intercessors. You pray THROUGH Saints, you confess THROUGH priests. It is a way to pray and do penance in community with others. It is a big deal in many faiths, but the RC church happens to use it in reconciliation as well.

Why not? It makes us unique.

"The Catholic Church maintains, however, that there is also a social aspect to sin. Sin not only affects our relationship with God, sin also alienates us from other people and the Church." - www.americancatholic.org

-------After his Resurrection, Jesus told the apostles, “Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained” (John 20:23).

-------The Letter of James says, “Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The fervent prayer of a righteous person is very powerful” (5:16).

Quirinus

03-21-2008, 18:25

What exactly happens when you get 'shriven'?

Evil_Maniac From Mars

03-21-2008, 18:34

The Roman Catholic faith is a faith of intercessors. You pray THROUGH Saints, you confess THROUGH priests. It is a way to pray in community with others. It is a big deal in many faiths, but the RC church happens to use it in contrition as well.

You don't have to pray through Saints. The only one besides God that I've ever prayed to is the Virgin Mary. Never even prayed to St. George (archery), St. Sebastian (athletes), Sebaldus (my hometown), or Julian the Hospitaller (murderers).

Wait, did I really say that?

ICantSpellDawg

03-21-2008, 18:38

You don't pray TO Saints, you merely pray in community with them TO God.

I updated my previous post with some new stuff that I found.

Evil_Maniac From Mars

03-21-2008, 18:45

You don't pray TO Saints, you merely pray in community with them TO God.

Well, yes, true.

Banquo's Ghost

03-21-2008, 21:00

What exactly happens when you get 'shriven'?

To shrive is the archaic term for the act of a priest hearing confession and pronouncing absolution.

I'm just an old traditionalist. To me, religion went downhill when the peasantry was allowed to have its own bibles... :wink:

The Chapters between William I (1066) and the Tudors (Henry VIII etc) are always called the Middle Ages, on account of their coming at the beginning; this was also The Age of Piety, since Religious fervour was then at its height, people being (1) burnt alive with faggots (The Steak) (2) bricked up in the walls of Convents (Religious Foundations) and (3) tortured in dungeons (The Confessional).

All this was not only pious but a Good Thing, as many of the people who were burnt, bricked, tortured, etc. became quite otherworldly.

Nowadays people are not so pious, even heretics being denied the benefits of fervent Religion.

Kralizec

03-21-2008, 21:41

I'm just an old traditionalist. To me, religion went downhill when the peasantry was allowed to have its own bibles... :wink:

If that's such a large beef for you, maybe you should consider Scientology ~;p

HoreTore

03-22-2008, 08:36

I think I'm drifting hard towards agnosticism for many reasons I don't want to lay out here. I did believe before but it's become harder and harder for me. :shrug:

We all know you're a nazi, Husar, you're not fooling anyone.

Rhyfelwyr

03-22-2008, 12:50

If you don't mind my asking, what country do you live in? I'm in the U.S. and my experience has generally been that people who refer to themselves specifically by denomination rather than as just Christians are more likely to have that attitude.

Well coming from a more mainstream Protestant grouping, the Evangelicals I know call themselves 'Christians', not by their individual denomination, and do not recongise other denominations as Christian.

Adrian II

03-22-2008, 15:20

We all know you're a nazi, Husar, you're not fooling anyone.And this from a notorious Stalinist. Tsk tsk.

*unfurls Trotskiite banner*

caravel

03-22-2008, 15:44

:book2:

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

03-22-2008, 16:50

Well coming from a more mainstream Protestant grouping, the Evangelicals I know call themselves 'Christians', not by their individual denomination, and do not recongise other denominations as Christian.

Do they sing catchy songs about how everyone else is going to hell?

They do here, and they are catchy. Doesn't stop me having a profoundly negative opinion of their theology though.

Evil_Maniac From Mars

03-23-2008, 07:29

One, two, three!

United forever in friendship and labour,
Our mighty republics will ever endure.
The great Soviet Union will live through the ages.
The dream of a people their fortress secure.

HoreTore

03-23-2008, 16:59

And this from a notorious Stalinist. Tsk tsk.

*unfurls Trotskiite banner*

Yeah, well...

My guy stayed in power longer than your guy, hah! :smash: :smash:

KrooK

03-23-2008, 17:41

"Undestanding Holy Trinity is like putting sea into bottle."

Understanding Christianity is like trying to be god - only god can absolutely understand god. :) I believe faith.

Evil_Maniac From Mars

03-23-2008, 17:49

Understanding Christianity is like trying to be god - only god can absolutely understand god. :) I believe faith.

:bow:

Well said. Christianity is faith, a belief.

Navaros

03-24-2008, 03:04

Misinformation right there.
Atleast keep the stories straight.
Being the son of god while being the god himself is just well sick.
Like something out of "Deliverance".
Unless Jesus is one god and "god" is another which makes christianity a polytheism. Of course with the trinity factor christianity is already one so I guess that just another deity to the tree.

Until you die of disease, old age or shot by some random drug addict etc
Reminds me of South Park.
"having sex with children had made him immortal so he lived for an eternity until he got hit by a train"

So that's why you don't get eternal life. Jesus gets jealous.
Common problem among first born

Is the one and only son us or Jesus ??
Make up your mind.

Now that is just plain wrong.
If he offered it freely you wouldn't have to worship him or submit yourself to him or even depend on him.
That's like giving away free samples of food as long as you pay for it.

Sorry but there is nothing wonderful about an eternal life.
It's a curse, not a gift.

According to the Bible, God encompasses three distinct personalities that make up the Godhead. All 3 parts are just as much God as each other - each of the 3 personalities is 100% God all by itself, and none of the 3 personalities are any "more God" than the other. And they are also 100% God when combined together, too. Those three personalities are: God, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit. That is the best way to explain it in a way that humans can be able to somewhat comprehend it. But yes, it doesn't make much sense because humans have a limited, human understanding. God is one, and three, at the same time. Jesus Christ is both God, and the Son of God, at the same time.

However, this concept being confusing and hard for a human to understand, doesn't mean the OP had misinformation in it. The OP's information is completely in line with what the Bible claims.

This is why in Genesis, the first book of the Bible, has God saying things like "Let us make man in our image". The "us" and "our" is the 3 parts of the Godhead.

In regards to your problems with the statement "He will forgive you and give you eternal life ". Eternal life refers to continuing to exist after one no longer exists in his her her human body. It was never meant to refer to living eternally in a human body. That is simply a personal misinterpretation of what the OP is saying, not misinformation.

I thought you thought that Jesus was a bleeding heart good for nothing liberal? What's happened to your religious rigour man? I used to admire the way you stood up against these newfangled wishy washy cults, and how you preached hell and brimstone old testament. What's happened to the old Navaros? Has he mellowed?

I still have real trouble trying to reconcile the Old Testament with the New Testament, and still do agree with the Old Testament much moreso. But I still believe in Jesus' divinity even though I don't agree with all his teachings. And I woulda understood the content of the OP as not being misinformation even if I didn't happen to agree with the information in it. The OP did not misrepresent the information represented in the Bible, so it's not misinformation. One could argue that he or she disagrees with the information in the OP, but the word "misinformation" implies the OP was deliberately posting information that is contrary to the information in the Bible, which is not the case.

Tribesman

03-24-2008, 03:48

I still have real trouble trying to reconcile the Old Testament with the New Testament
well that might be because you are tryng to reconcile very different things by many different authors that have been altered countless times ... or it could be that as Zuch suggests you havn't heard the word of god .
Then again it could be that Zuch hasn't really heard the word of God and is claiming he has so he doesn't have to address the contradictions .

Paradox

03-24-2008, 14:38

come on people, an elephant's head on a kid! How cool is that? ;)
What the heck are you talking about?:inquisitive:

One post I read that Jesus was the son of god and the other says that he IS god, which is it already?

Vladimir

03-24-2008, 15:00

What the heck are you talking about?:inquisitive:

One post I read that Jesus was the son of god and the other says that he IS god, which is it already?

I believe that question was answered by the consul of Nicea. If you love theology read up on the Nicene creed.

Husar

03-24-2008, 15:00

One post I read that Jesus was the son of god and the other says that he IS god, which is it already?
Both. ~D

Vladimir

03-24-2008, 15:44

Both. ~D

I believe that question was answered by the consul of Nicea. If you love theology read up on the Nicene creed.

Pretty much.

Banquo's Ghost

03-24-2008, 16:38

According to the Bible, God encompasses three distinct personalities that make up the Godhead. All 3 parts are just as much God as each other - each of the 3 personalities is 100% God all by itself, and none of the 3 personalities are any "more God" than the other. And they are also 100% God when combined together, too. Those three personalities are: God, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit. That is the best way to explain it in a way that humans can be able to somewhat comprehend it.

What you need here, good Navaros, is a shamrock.

:bow:

Don Corleone

03-24-2008, 20:32

The elephant head was in reference to Ganesh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ganesh).

The way I had the Trinity explained to me was with reference to geography (courtesy of Sister Priscilla Paradis). The Atlantic Ocean is NOT the Pacific Ocean, yet they ARE the same body of water, no?

Geoffrey S

03-24-2008, 21:05

Three sides of the same coin springs to mind.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

03-24-2008, 22:46

For those among us who do not regularly spin off the Creeds and have them down by heart, wiki is fairly accurate here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicene_Creed

Mind, I can't imagine how you'd fake the Creed.

As to the issue of the resurrection, I'm afraid the Dean of Exeter doesn't agree with you Nav. Jewish, and hence Christian resurrection is a bodily matter as well as spiritural one. Have a look at revelations again.

As to the Holy Trinity, to paraphase Boethius, "If I say; one sword, one brand, one blade, I am still only referring to one sword." I rather like that, even if it is unfortunately martial.

Sigurd

03-24-2008, 22:56

Kralizec

03-25-2008, 00:49

The way I had the Trinity explained to me was with reference to geography (courtesy of Sister Priscilla Paradis). The Atlantic Ocean is NOT the Pacific Ocean, yet they ARE the same body of water, no?

Somebody once explained it to me using a three leafed clover as an analogy. I like this one better, though.

Papewaio

03-25-2008, 01:36

MilesGregarius

03-25-2008, 05:39

But I still believe in Jesus' divinity even though I don't agree with all his teachings.

Huh?

What I can never get about certain branches of Christianity is their need to proclaim their personal relationship with Jesus and that He is their Lord and Savior, but that they prefer the Old Testament's fire and brimstone or Paul's ego-stroking proclamations of Christians' specialness.

To me, the only relevant part of the Bible to one who sees Jesus as the Messiah are the Gospels. If Jesus is the Messiah, how can His teachings be subordinate to those of the Old Testament writers or to those of the Epistles? If there is conflict or contradiction between the them, how can Jesus' own words not take precedence?

Ironside

03-25-2008, 10:02

What about the Godhead actually being 3 seperate enteties? It too will fit into what is written in the Bible.
And it will actually make sense as to one being the father of the other.
Oh wait, the polytheistic problem :wall:

The Bible doesn't contradict Arius either from what I've understand, that's why the church coined the term trinity in the first place. And the nature of the trinity was/is also heavily debated as the filioque clause shows.

But if you really want a theological mess on your hands then the nature of the divinity of Jesus is fun to study and it's almost as important as what kind of bread you should eat in the Eucharist. :book:

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

03-25-2008, 14:02

Huh?

What I can never get about certain branches of Christianity is their need to proclaim their personal relationship with Jesus and that He is their Lord and Savior, but that they prefer the Old Testament's fire and brimstone or Paul's ego-stroking proclamations of Christians' specialness.

To me, the only relevant part of the Bible to one who sees Jesus as the Messiah are the Gospels. If Jesus is the Messiah, how can His teachings be subordinate to those of the Old Testament writers or to those of the Epistles? If there is conflict or contradiction between the them, how can Jesus' own words not take precedence?

You can't, the Gospels come up trumps.

I recently worked out what bothers me about Evangelical Christians, the whole focus of Jesus tends to ignore the Almighty and hence there's far too much focus on Jesus' love.

What's the problem with that you ask?

Well, it allows you to beat up on hummanity without reservation, we're all wretched, the only reason God saves us is because he loves us, we don't deserve it etc... What I realised is that God is not only Loving, he is Just, so there must be something in hummanity worthy of redemption or at least the chance of it.

Ergo, we don't completely suck, just mostly.

Navaros

03-27-2008, 07:52

What I can never get about certain branches of Christianity is their need to proclaim their personal relationship with Jesus and that He is their Lord and Savior, but that they prefer the Old Testament's fire and brimstone or Paul's ego-stroking proclamations of Christians' specialness.

To me, the only relevant part of the Bible to one who sees Jesus as the Messiah are the Gospels. If Jesus is the Messiah, how can His teachings be subordinate to those of the Old Testament writers or to those of the Epistles? If there is conflict or contradiction between the them, how can Jesus' own words not take precedence?

The New Testament doesn't make a crystal clear statement about the Old Testament being invalid. Jesus said he did not come to abolish the Law (meaning, the Old Testament). Yet at the same time, he also contradicted a whole whackload of what the Old Testament said. Jesus also made references to much of the content of the Old Testament being accurate.

His teachings should logically be subordinate to the Old Testament because the teachings there were given by God the Father, who Jesus prayed to and was subordinate to during his time on Earth. Besides that, God is supposed to be eternal and unchanging, and Jesus' words as recorded in the Bible, do not bother to explain what caused God to "change his mind" about all these things.

Then there is Paul and the Apostles who in the New Testament, affirmed the validity of the Old Testament's teachings in addition to Jesus and claimed that both are to be practiced together, even though they can't be totally reconciled with each other.

I have to come to realize that there is no infalliable way for a human being to interpret all of these and similar things, and that is why there are so many different labels of Christianity and interpretations of what it means to be Christian.

The root cause of all these problems is that a book is an inadequate format to contain all these things. The only format that would actually work would be an interactive format, with God and/or Jesus directly answering every specific question that is ever put to them, live on demand, to every person who ever asks them something.

Tribesman

03-27-2008, 08:33

OK enough of that , stop it , bring back the other Navaros .

Geoffrey S

03-27-2008, 12:40

The root cause of all these problems is that a book is an inadequate format to contain all these things. The only format that would actually work would be an interactive format, with God and/or Jesus directly answering every specific question that is ever put to them, live on demand, to every person who ever asks them something.
Sounds like we need a message board with the Bible as FAQ?

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

03-27-2008, 14:30

The New Testament doesn't make a crystal clear statement about the Old Testament being invalid. Jesus said he did not come to abolish the Law (meaning, the Old Testament). Yet at the same time, he also contradicted a whole whackload of what the Old Testament said. Jesus also made references to much of the content of the Old Testament being accurate.

His teachings should logically be subordinate to the Old Testament because the teachings there were given by God the Father, who Jesus prayed to and was subordinate to during his time on Earth. Besides that, God is supposed to be eternal and unchanging, and Jesus' words as recorded in the Bible, do not bother to explain what caused God to "change his mind" about all these things.

Then there is Paul and the Apostles who in the New Testament, affirmed the validity of the Old Testament's teachings in addition to Jesus and claimed that both are to be practiced together, even though they can't be totally reconciled with each other.

What about this: The Old Testemant was transmitted through human prophets, while the Gospels are the words of the Christ, the manifestation of God on Earth. So logically God came down himself to iron out the kinks and that is why the Gospels are the ultimate authoriety.

KukriKhan

03-28-2008, 03:05

What about this: The Old Testemant was transmitted through human prophets, while the Gospels are the words of the Christ, the manifestation of God on Earth. So logically God came down himself to iron out the kinks and that is why the Gospels are the ultimate authoriety.

That's a tempting tack, but wouldn't it only work if the Nazarene (or his dad) had authored his own book/gospel? In the end, the gospels are the accounts of men, about the christ, the same as the pentateuch is/are the accounts of men, about god, the father.

ICantSpellDawg

03-28-2008, 03:08

That's a tempting tack, but wouldn't it only work if the Nazarene (or his dad) had authored his own book/gospel? In the end, the gospels are the accounts of men, about the christ, the same as the pentateuch is/are the accounts of men, about god, the father.

I don't understand why people need to rationalize the irrational.

Logically that is most likely. However, if there is a God and he just does whatever the hell he wants, is it that much of a stretch to think that he inspired these guys with the Holy Spirit to write the books? Wouldn't that be the new logic?

Would it be logical to question the legitimacy of God's actions if you believed him to be real?

I don't think so, but that's just me.

Jesus was either just man, just God, or both. If you believe that Jesus was sent by God, ascended into Heaven and is seated at the right hand of God to judge the living and the dead, you kind of threw out secular logic long ago, no? There is nothing wrong with that. I've never been a fan of secular logic even though I try to use it as often as possible.

KukriKhan

03-28-2008, 03:53

And we do have Exodus 24:12

The Lord said to Moses, ‘Come up to me on the mountain, and wait there; and I will give you the tablets of stone, with the law and the commandment, which I have written for their instruction.’

So I guess we have at least one instance where an almighty asserts to have written something (the ten commandments) with his own hand.

You make fine points, TuffStuff, and I disagree with none of that. Religions seem to require that I stop using these things I regard as assets in all other aspects (logic, free will, skepticism...) , because they are hinderances to getting closer to god.

I don't know why I am supposed to get closer than I am, while I'm living. Or why these seeming instincts I have - presumeably gifts from god - are supposed to get thrown away, or at least suspended?

ICantSpellDawg

03-28-2008, 04:35

And we do have Exodus 24:12

So I guess we have at least one instance where an almighty asserts to have written something (the ten commandments) with his own hand.

You make fine points, TuffStuff, and I disagree with none of that. Religions seem to require that I stop using these things I regard as assets in all other aspects (logic, free will, skepticism...) , because they are hinderances to getting closer to god.

I don't know why I am supposed to get closer than I am, while I'm living. Or why these seeming instincts I have - presumeably gifts from god - are supposed to get thrown away, or at least suspended?

Sometimes it seems that people fear being judged by Dworkian after death rather than God.
"You didn't use enough logic or reason in life" he would say.
"You really wasted your infinitesimal existence on faith"

Have faith and pursue goodness. Use whatever tools that the earth provides, but if those tools get in the way of truth, avoid them.

We do not want a thing because we reason; we find reasons for a thing because we want it. Mind invents logic for the whims of the will.

I think about that every time I put too much stock into what I understand about the world from a logical perspective. Then I think about what I was raised to believe. I'm much more worried about being judged by mom and God.

Big_John

03-28-2008, 04:58

I think about that every time I put too much stock into what I understand about the world from a logical perspective. Then I think about what I was raised to believe. I'm much more worried about being judged by mom and God.that hegel quote is certainly cute, but it lacks much utility. you can't reject the rationality that ultimately underlies our world, our 'wants', unless you're a schizophrenic. whether we can tease out the logic behind our wants (though, increasingly, we can), is irrelevant to our existence in a physical world.

ICantSpellDawg

03-28-2008, 14:14

that hegel quote is certainly cute, but it lacks much utility. you can't reject the rationality that ultimately underlies our world, our 'wants', unless you're a schizophrenic. whether we can tease out the logic behind our wants (though, increasingly, we can), is irrelevant to our existence in a physical world.

That quote means to me that logic serves our interests, rather than the other way around. It is based on what WE know or believe to be true.

You may believe that there is some superlative logical understanding that everyone has, but I don't believe it. It is a way of showing ourselves a way to get what we want. Reality is relative as all of us frequently point out on this forum.

KukriKhan

03-28-2008, 14:22

That's almost buddhist there, TuffStuff:

Cease desire : attain enlightenment

Nice.

ICantSpellDawg

03-28-2008, 14:42

That's almost buddhist there, TuffStuff:

Cease desire : attain enlightenment

Nice.

yep. Find Jesus. Follow Buddha.

Big_John

03-28-2008, 20:06

That quote means to me that logic serves our interests, rather than the other way around. It is based on what WE know or believe to be true.that's a superficial analysis. certainly we can create tertiary rationales that serve to help us acquire our desires. but there is a logic that motivates those desires in the first place. just as there is a logic that motivates a lion's desires, or an amoeba's, or a daffodil's.

You may believe that there is some superlative logical understanding that everyone has, but I don't believe it. It is a way of showing ourselves a way to get what we want. Reality is relative as all of us frequently point out on this forum.simply, nonsense.

certainly there is a subjective aspect to 'reality' since we are phenomenal beings. but the probability that a consensual, objective reality exists must be nearly 100%, even if we can't access it without perception getting in the way. it's hardly important that you concede that point, the very fact that we are interacting illustrates it.

why would you even want to assume we live in a psychedelic, fantasy world? yellow submarine sucked.

ICantSpellDawg

03-28-2008, 20:22

that's a superficial analysis. certainly we can create tertiary rationales that serve to help us acquire our desires. but there is a logic that motivates those desires in the first place. just as there is a logic that motivates a lion's desires, or an amoeba's, or a daffodil's.

simply, nonsense.

certainly there is a subjective aspect to 'reality' since we are phenomenal beings. but the probability that a consensual, objective reality exists must be nearly 100%, even if we can't access it without perception getting in the way. it's hardly important that you concede that point, the very fact that we are interacting illustrates it.

why would you even want to assume we live in a psychedelic, fantasy world? yellow submarine sucked.

All of my analyses are superficial. Commenting on them is redundant.

I didn't say that we lived in a yellow submarine fantasy world.

Lions attack gazelles, gazelles probably think the lions foolish. Gazelles are probably saying to themselves "with all this grass to eat, why do the lions need to eat me? It's sooo illogical"

You may say that it is the "circle of life". Where is the logic in that?

Would you hold the same standard to homicide? "species arn't supposed to hunt their own - it isn't logical"

What would you base that on? We are a species and we do. We are the "top of the food chain" - some hunt people, others are hunted. We have gone to war with one another since history began writing itself. In this sense it is logical. If lions stopped hunting gazzelles, the gazzelle population would probably skyrocket. Maybe even from 6 billion to 6.6 billion in just 7 years... (http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?c=xx&v=21)

Religion, by many accounts, contributes to charity and happiness. Lower suicide rates, higher donation rates. Maybe the logic is in the endgame.

Who knows. We don't really know why we do what we do. We come up with theories, but they just ask 2 new questions and barely answer the first. Rationalization is fun and it molds "reality" for us if we'd like it to.

Big_John

03-28-2008, 20:31

All of my analyses are superficial. Commenting on them is redundant.increasingly..

Would you hold the same standard to homicide? "species arn't supposed to hunt their own - it isn't logical"

What would you base that on? We are a species and we do. We are the "top of the food chain" - some hunt people, others are hunted. We have gone to war with one another since history began writing itself. In this sense it is logical.of course homicide serves a logical purpose. it wouldn't be so common otherwise. in broad terms, it serves to eliminate competition.

Religion, by many accounts, contributes to charity and happiness. Lower suicide rates, higher donation rates.i've pointed that out many times before. btw, i'm happy to see you putting murder and religion in the same box. ;)

Maybe the logic is in the endgame.

Who knows. Rationalization is fun and it molds "reality" for us if we'd like it to.only to a degree. but next time you sprout tentacles and walk on the surface of the sun, let me know so i can revise my understanding of reality's boundaries.

ICantSpellDawg

03-28-2008, 20:33

increasingly..
of course homicide serves a logical purpose. it wouldn't be so common otherwise. in broad terms, it serves to eliminate competition.
i've pointed that out many times before. btw, i'm happy to see you putting murder and religion in the same box. ;)
only to a degree. but next time you sprout tentacles and walk on the surface of the sun, let me know so i can revise my understanding of reality's boundaries.

So destroying competition through murder is logical? I wonder what else that undermines life we can agree on.

Big_John

03-28-2008, 20:36

So destroying competition through murder is logical?historically speaking, yes. in societies with rules against murder, not as much. but we're very old animals. old habits are hard to break.

ICantSpellDawg

03-28-2008, 20:37

historically speaking, yes. in societies with rules against murder, not as much. but we're very old animals. old habits are hard to break.
Homicide wouldn't be murder without those rules.

Why do we need to break those habits?
You mean the weak need to break those habits in those who would benefit from homicide?

Big_John

03-28-2008, 20:45

Homicide wouldn't be murder without those rules.fair enough. i was mainly talking about individual homicide, both inside and outside of society.

Why do we need to break those habits?so society does kill or ostracize us.

You mean the weak need to break those habits in those who would benefit from homicide?game theory. every member's genes benefits from larger, more complex societies. notice how europeans populate north america these days.

ICantSpellDawg

03-28-2008, 20:53

hehe. I'm just killing time. There are plenty of logical reasons by numerous standards for Christianity. I'm going home for the weekend and my nature is to attack and tear apart, more so when I am leaving a week of work.

Big_John

03-28-2008, 21:14

there are logical reasons to have a 'faith' (happiness, etc), though i'm not aware of faith-specific reasonings.

Rhyfelwyr

04-15-2008, 21:18

In response to the original post I have said that prayer, more than once IIRC, when I went to an Evangelical church, not sure exactly what type, with a friend of mine when I was younger. Although I used to go more regularly to Church of Scotland services I genuinely tried to be sincere in the prayer, although I'm not sure if I was. I seem to be doing a reverse of the standard and getting more religious as I get older...

As for my Evangelical friend he's currently trying to prove the existence of dragons, since apparently they are referred to in the bible. He's also trying to show these and maybe other dinosaurs existed within the bibles timeframe, somthing to do with red blood cells which should have disappeared or something like that dont' ask me to get into the science.

EDIT: Apologisations for the lack of grammage in the above posting...

Divinus Arma

04-16-2008, 05:05

The Trinity:

The Father is a title used to more easily understand the Divine Mind. The Divine Mind is the intellect of God, his self-awareness. The self-aware perspective of the Lord exists not merely in the physical reality in which you and I perceive, but reality itself outside of time and space, where all matter and energy exist formless, fleeting and permanent all in one. Only a perspective absent of the frames of space and time can "see" reality as it really is. When there is no small and there is no large, nothing near and nothing in the distance. When past, present, and future are non-existent as points of reference. This can only be possible when the perceiving mind is capable of an objective sense of space, where subjective references of size and distance are unremarkable and unnecessary. This can only be possible when the perceiving mind exists eternal, where all events can be experienced simultaneously. Because God is all things at all times, and his perspective is equally limitless, allowing to experience all things and at all times, our Lord is as the word reveals him to be: Self-aware; Omniscient, and omnipercipient.

The Holy Spirit is the fabric of existence: The Divine Will. The intangible component of particulate interactions that forms the relationship between matter and energy and allows shape to manifest out of nothingness. The Divine Will is the infinite power of the Divine Mind to shape and create, the capability and being to manipulate energy into matter. While also governing the laws of science that allow the creation to exist, the Divine Will is the whole of creation itself. Thus again, the word reveals our Lord to be omnipresent and Omnipotent.

The Son is our title for the Divine Will manifested into the form of a human being with all of the limitations of a human mind and body, especially human intellect, human understanding, and human perception. Thus, the Divine Mind of God exists independently of the mind of Jesus though they are coexistent through the Divine Will. Jesus Christ does not have a separate and unique human soul much as we do, but instead is in entirety the Holy Spirit.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

04-16-2008, 14:13

Divinus Arma

04-17-2008, 01:16

I'm not stating that the Son is a created being. Only his physical form was "created". Jesus Christ did not "physically", as in the form of a human, exist prior to his birth. He existed since the original creation, one with the Father. The Son, the Father, and the Holy Spirit are all connected and indivisible. The form is what is different. Like a drop of water from an infinite ocean, Jesus is the drop, but still water.

Sigurd

04-17-2008, 12:52

I'm not stating that the Son is a created being. Only his physical form was "created".
Jesus Christ did not "physically", as in the form of a human, exist prior to his birth.
I am following you this far

He existed since the original creation, one with the Father.

So... he did not exist prior to the original creation? (definition?)

The Son, the Father, and the Holy Spirit are all connected and indivisible. The form is what is different. Like a drop of water from an infinite ocean, Jesus is the drop, but still water.
So... Jesus is no longer physical, and different from the Father and the Holy spirit who are not physical?

Adrian II

04-17-2008, 14:52

Teh old! (http://faculty.wlc.edu/thompson/fourth-century/index.htm?http&&&faculty.wlc.edu/thompson/fourth-century/councils/nicaea325/index.htm)

Ronin

04-17-2008, 15:03

I am following you this far

So... he did not exist prior to the original creation? (definition?)

So... Jesus is no longer physical, and different from the Father and the Holy spirit who are not physical?

now you know why priests have wine during mass.

after a couple of glasses it all makes more sense :laugh4:

Divinus Arma

04-17-2008, 23:07

Sorry, I'm not exactly 100% capable of articulating this myself, and misstatements can completetly change the meaning of a sentence.

I am following you this far

So... he did not exist prior to the original creation? (definition?)

Sorry. I meant that Jesus, being God, has existed as long as God. Just not in a human form. Jesus is the mouthpiece of the Father, the WORD by which the Father may communicate directly to us.

So... Jesus is no longer physical, and different from the Father and the Holy spirit who are not physical?

Jesus is a physical manifestation of the Holy Spirit, with a human mind rather than the self-aware intellect of God.

The Father is the intellect of God. The Holy Spirit is the essence of God; God's experience of the world, the will of the intellect.

Here is an analogy: Think of your self-aware intellect. Is that physical? Think of your desires and urges: Is that physical? Your desires and urges become physical when you transform your environment to match your will. Not in a literal sense, but the physical world you leave in a moment of choice is an echo of your determination.

So to with the Intellect and Will of God. The intellect (Father) dictates, the will (Holy Spirit) manifests, and we experience the echo of that determination.

Jesus Christ is both the determination and the echo.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

04-18-2008, 01:35

Divinus Arma

04-18-2008, 04:13

I don't buy that all the way.

We have:

God the Father

God the Son

God the Holy Ghost.

Now, since God has existed since the beggining, he cannot be divided, be more or less, he cannot grow diminish etc. the Son must have existed co-eternally with the father.

If the Father were to create the Son then there would be a divine liniage, with a beggining in time, but God is whole, eternal and indivisable.

So, the Son has to have existed since the beggining.

I agree. Did I communicate some other idea?

This does not mean that Jesus has existed since the beggining, but that the entity we call the God the Son has. Various instances for him to pop up are the Garden of Eden and the wrestling match in Genesis, as well as, perhaps, Mount Sinai etc.

Here is the part that is fuzzy to me. Are we saying that a divine being, whom we call the Son, existed along side the Father?

I can't agree with that because it diminishes the divinity of the Son and seperates the identity of the Son from the Father. Either the Son is God or he isn't God.

My real problem with the traditionally accepted viewpoint of the Trinity is the narrow language used to describe each. I think the titles used effectively serve a population that is incapable of thinking critically as historically has been the case with humanity. However, as we have developed and grown as beings, our intellectual capacity for understanding the nature of Christ, God, and the Spirit has also developed and grown.

So why cling to antiquated and indescriptive terminology when more thoughtful and consequential analysis can be applied?

In our modern era, if we believers fail to demonstrate the relationship of God to humanity and existence in a way that is scientific and analytical, we undermine the very purpose that God has created for us. In challenging convention and growing spiritually and intellectually, we are able to breach the walls of theory and mystery and enter into a new reality and a new relationship with the Lord.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

04-18-2008, 14:40

I agree. Did I communicate some other idea?

Not quite, see below.

Here is the part that is fuzzy to me. Are we saying that a divine being, whom we call the Son, existed along side the Father?

I can't agree with that because it diminishes the divinity of the Son and seperates the identity of the Son from the Father. Either the Son is God or he isn't God.

He doesn't exist alongside because He cannot be divided. However, if the Son did not exist in the Beggining he is not co-eternal with the Father and the Holy Ghost. Then he would be less. God the Son might also be termed the "voice" of God, his means of communicating with his creation on our restricted level.

My real problem with the traditionally accepted viewpoint of the Trinity is the narrow language used to describe each. I think the titles used effectively serve a population that is incapable of thinking critically as historically has been the case with humanity. However, as we have developed and grown as beings, our intellectual capacity for understanding the nature of Christ, God, and the Spirit has also developed and grown.

So why cling to antiquated and indescriptive terminology when more thoughtful and consequential analysis can be applied?

We're two fairly bright guys here. How do you explain the metaphyisical and philosophical arguements to a child? You need a relatively simple way of dealing with the concepts on some level.

In our modern era, if we believers fail to demonstrate the relationship of God to humanity and existence in a way that is scientific and analytical, we undermine the very purpose that God has created for us. In challenging convention and growing spiritually and intellectually, we are able to breach the walls of theory and mystery and enter into a new reality and a new relationship with the Lord.

Dissagree, ultimately God requires blind faith, he doesn't ever have to expalin or justify Himself or His actions. We can defend our faith against people who claim to have disproved it but we should seek a dogmatic physical proof. This is especially true if you believe faith is required in order to enter heaven. Prove God exists and you destroy faith, everyone goes to Hell.

Rhyfelwyr

04-18-2008, 21:53

We will never be able to prove the existence of God, though we may take it upon ourselves to tackle those who ridicule him.

Faith will always be a fundamental role in Christianity.

Mooks

04-19-2008, 15:49

We will never be able to prove the existence of God, though we may take it upon ourselves to tackle those who ridicule him.

Faith will always be a fundamental role in Christianity.

Thats one of my biggest problems with christrianity. They make faith (aka blind obediance) a virtue.

Rhyfelwyr

04-19-2008, 18:14

Well we choose whether or not to have faith, and can quit anytime we want.

ICantSpellDawg

04-19-2008, 18:22

Thats one of my biggest problems with christrianity. They make faith (aka blind obediance) a virtue.

As opposed to modern society, where the only virtue is the defense of vice.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

04-19-2008, 19:44

Thats one of my biggest problems with christrianity. They make faith (aka blind obediance) a virtue.

Say what? I'm a Protestant. I don't obay anyone.

Mooks

04-19-2008, 20:01

Say what? I'm a Protestant. I don't obay anyone.

Im glad you have convinced yourself you dont follow anyone. In reality, you bow the knee to a celestial deity. No matter how you look at it, thats what "worship" is.

Well we choose whether or not to have faith, and can quit anytime we want.

In the Islam religion the punishment for Apostasy is death. In christrianity, its a promise of eternal burning and suffering (at least you wont be alone though, according to christrianity their will be billions of others in their with you.) :inquisitive: . If you really believe that stuff, its not really much of a choice.

Rhyfelwyr

04-19-2008, 23:52

Im glad you have convinced yourself you dont follow anyone. In reality, you bow the knee to a celestial deity. No matter how you look at it, thats what "worship" is.

In the Islam religion the punishment for Apostasy is death. In christrianity, its a promise of eternal burning and suffering (at least you wont be alone though, according to christrianity their will be billions of others in their with you.) :inquisitive: . If you really believe that stuff, its not really much of a choice.

Well the hard-core atheists (or agnostics is it?) are so stubbornly opposed to the idea of owing any sort of loyalty to God they say they'd rather go to hell. Heaven forbid such enlightened, liberal, freedom-loving, reasonable people as themselves should ever bow down to anyone!

Divinus Arma

04-20-2008, 14:39

He doesn't exist alongside because He cannot be divided. However, if the Son did not exist in the Beggining he is not co-eternal with the Father and the Holy Ghost. Then he would be less. God the Son might also be termed the "voice" of God, his means of communicating with his creation on our restricted level.

I agree and I think I stated this earlier.

We're two fairly bright guys here. How do you explain the metaphyisical and philosophical arguements to a child? You need a relatively simple way of dealing with the concepts on some level.

I'm really just referring to adults. But again, I thought I had stated that this simple terminology is effective for that large part of the population who don't think critically.

Dissagree, ultimately God requires blind faith, he doesn't ever have to expalin or justify Himself or His actions. We can defend our faith against people who claim to have disproved it but we should seek a dogmatic physical proof. This is especially true if you believe faith is required in order to enter heaven. Prove God exists and you destroy faith, everyone goes to Hell.

Here is where we really are in disagreement, because we are on the same page on alot of other things.

Why does God require blind faith? Faith, to a degree, perhaps. But why must it be blind? I don't find anything wrong with supplementing faith with an intelligent and relentless pursuit of means in which God reveals himself in the natural world.

As far as "faith" being necessary to get into "heaven": I don't personally believe heaven to be a "place" at all, since God is absent of time and space. I think simply that if we live out life in allignment with the Lord's will, and our will take a backseat to His, then in death too we will continue to experience His will. Faith isn't the only priority, but faith as we know it now is a first step to submissive and joyous following.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

04-20-2008, 14:56

I agree and I think I stated this earlier.

I think your explanation leans towards the Son being merely a conflation of the Father and the Spirit, rather than something on an equal footing with both.

I'm really just referring to adults. But again, I thought I had stated that this simple terminology is effective for that large part of the population who don't think critically.

Ok, fine, agree.

Here is where we really are in disagreement, because we are on the same page on alot of other things.

Why does God require blind faith? Faith, to a degree, perhaps. But why must it be blind? I don't find anything wrong with supplementing faith with an intelligent and relentless pursuit of means in which God reveals himself in the natural world.

As far as "faith" being necessary to get into "heaven": I don't personally believe heaven to be a "place" at all, since God is absent of time and space. I think simply that if we live out life in allignment with the Lord's will, and our will take a backseat to His, then in death too we will continue to experience His will. Faith isn't the only priority, but faith as we know it now is a first step to submissive and joyous following.

Well, you can't "prove" anything about God because he is beyond out experience and trying to do so is rather like trying to build the tower of Babel. Given that God created the universe he must be in some manner outside it, seperate from matter, energy and time. So I don't see how he can be in any way measurable. That doesn't mean I don't think his presence is manifest in the world in certain ways but you'll never be able to make a direct link.

Divinus Arma

04-25-2008, 05:21

I think your explanation leans towards the Son being merely a conflation of the Father and the Spirit, rather than something on an equal footing with both.

Hmmm. Well, as far as equal footing, Jesus had the limitations of human physicality. Body, brain, everything. Even Jesus woke up with a boner from time to time. He did, after all, have a penis. And Jesus took a dump in the sand when the need arose. I don't think that the Father was ever restricted with the demands of his G.I. tract.

Benedict, pull the Pope-Mobile over. That curry is on its way out!

So, I only mean to point out that Jesus Christ had all of the physical limitations of any human being. Which is the very reason why he is so relevant. He was God as one of us. God was able to drop a deuce and drain the weasel, to have friends and communicate directly in relationships, etc.

The living will, of the Father, the Holy Spirit, was His soul and guiding force, just as you have your own soul which influences your mind and behavior.

That doesn't make Jesus inferior. It just articulates his nature with greater detail than that offered by the nicean creed.

Well, you can't "prove" anything about God because he is beyond out experience and trying to do so is rather like trying to build the tower of Babel. Given that God created the universe he must be in some manner outside it, seperate from matter, energy and time. So I don't see how he can be in any way measurable. That doesn't mean I don't think his presence is manifest in the world in certain ways but you'll never be able to make a direct link.

Is God really beyond our experience? If he is, then you don't have a relationship with him.

Measurable? No, God is not measurable. But infinity is a quantification no less. But I don't think quantifying God is even useful. The qualification of God, or rather the detailing of his quality, is what is useful. The question I ask is "What is God made of?" Rather than "How much God is there?" And this is where my point on the differentiating aspects of three presentations of God are important. The Father is the self-awareness. You are self-aware and that is not quantifiable. Are you infinite or finite? That doesn't really matter. What does matter is that what makes up "you" as far as self-aware experience goes is the same as what makes up the Father. This is how we are made in his likeness. Not because the Father has hands and a face, but because he is self-aware and experiential as you and I are. The difference of course is the limitation of perception. Where ours is restricted by the inputs of physical sensors and the interpretation of a physical brain to relay that experience to our self-awareness, His perception is not limited. This does not mean that he is outside of time and space. It means that time and space are not immediately consequential or relevant to him. His desire is a relationship with us. And that connection, that relationship, is the only thing we can experience in our existence that is free of time and space.

Now that is just the Divine Mind. The Father.

The Holy Spirit is an entirely different but equal and connected component.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

04-26-2008, 12:46

Hmmm. Well, as far as equal footing, Jesus had the limitations of human physicality. Body, brain, everything. Even Jesus woke up with a boner from time to time. He did, after all, have a penis. And Jesus took a dump in the sand when the need arose. I don't think that the Father was ever restricted with the demands of his G.I. tract.

Benedict, pull the Pope-Mobile over. That curry is on its way out!

So, I only mean to point out that Jesus Christ had all of the physical limitations of any human being. Which is the very reason why he is so relevant. He was God as one of us. God was able to drop a deuce and drain the weasel, to have friends and communicate directly in relationships, etc.

The living will, of the Father, the Holy Spirit, was His soul and guiding force, just as you have your own soul which influences your mind and behavior.

That doesn't make Jesus inferior. It just articulates his nature with greater detail than that offered by the nicean creed.

Ah, I see, you equate Jesus and God the Son completely. I wouldn't dissagree that Jesus was limited but God the Son is not because He does not occupy a human body. Given that a human body is a temporal and physical thing I don't believe God the Son had one before Jesus' birth, nor am I convinced he has one now.

Is God really beyond our experience? If he is, then you don't have a relationship with him.

Measurable? No, God is not measurable. But infinity is a quantification no less. But I don't think quantifying God is even useful. The qualification of God, or rather the detailing of his quality, is what is useful. The question I ask is "What is God made of?" Rather than "How much God is there?" And this is where my point on the differentiating aspects of three presentations of God are important. The Father is the self-awareness. You are self-aware and that is not quantifiable. Are you infinite or finite? That doesn't really matter. What does matter is that what makes up "you" as far as self-aware experience goes is the same as what makes up the Father. This is how we are made in his likeness. Not because the Father has hands and a face, but because he is self-aware and experiential as you and I are. The difference of course is the limitation of perception. Where ours is restricted by the inputs of physical sensors and the interpretation of a physical brain to relay that experience to our self-awareness, His perception is not limited. This does not mean that he is outside of time and space. It means that time and space are not immediately consequential or relevant to him. His desire is a relationship with us. And that connection, that relationship, is the only thing we can experience in our existence that is free of time and space.

Now that is just the Divine Mind. The Father.

The Holy Spirit is an entirely different but equal and connected component.

Hmmm, interesting, I shall have to ponder this bit.

Divinus Arma

04-27-2008, 22:02

Ah, I see, you equate Jesus and God the Son completely. I wouldn't dissagree that Jesus was limited but God the Son is not because He does not occupy a human body. Given that a human body is a temporal and physical thing I don't believe God the Son had one before Jesus' birth, nor am I convinced he has one now.

I concur. Jesus dis not have a physical body before his borth nor after his death.

But this raises the question for many: Was Jesus, prior to birth or after death, a self-aware entity seperate from the Father?

On this point, I say NO. I would argue that as Jesus "ascended to the father", his self-awareness became the Father's self-awareness. He became one with the Divine Mind through the Holy Spirit. I believe that this is what will happen when we die. This is the Kingdom of Heaven that Jesus spoke about. Many of Jesus' teachings centered on "who gets to go". It was clear that the essence of His parables was the unification of our individual spirit and will with that of the Holy Spirit. We must have that connection and live our lives with the will of God guiding us.

Look at 1 John 1:5-1:10. This is an example of alligning our will with the will of God. The problem is that the choice of words is not relevant to modern readers! People these days roll their eyes when they hear the word "sin". While a succinctly descriptive term, the word fails to explain itself relative to our behavior and our thoughts as they apply to the desire of the Father. Frankly, much of the bible reads like an angry old parent scolding its child.

But the greatest truth that I have discovered is that our Lord is NOT an angry parent. He is the :daisy: man. When I live my life in accordance with His will, I don't feel like I am restricting myself to archaic rules. I feel totally fulfilled. He knows what I really want and what truly makes me happy. If I just listen and follow along, then my life grows with joy and experience. Nothing else brings me that sense of purpose.

Hmmm, interesting, I shall have to ponder this bit.

:bow:

Mooks

04-28-2008, 10:51

But the greatest truth that I have discovered is that our Lord is NOT an angry parent. He is the :daisy: man. When I live my life in accordance with His will, I don't feel like I am restricting myself to archaic rules. I feel totally fulfilled. He knows what I really want and what truly makes me happy. If I just listen and follow along, then my life grows with joy and experience. Nothing else brings me that sense of purpose.

See: 7 plagues of Egypt, noah's flood, the massacre of the various tribes that had conflicts with the ancient hebrews.

If the christrian/jewish god was to be compared with a parent, its the kind of parent that kills the boy that dates his daughter.

Also, iv heard almost exactly the same thing you said from a muslim (meaning that people from other faiths feel the EXACT same way you do when it comes to god in their lifes). Just because it "feels" true doesnt mean it is.

Gaius Scribonius Curio

04-28-2008, 11:20

Also, iv heard almost exactly the same thing you said from a muslim (meaning that people from other faiths feel the EXACT same way you do when it comes to god in their lifes). Just because it "feels" true doesnt mean it is.

Know its not really to do with the discussion, particularly since I'm an atheist myself, but maybe its because in essence all religions are about giving meaning to lives that don't have it. Ergo, if a devout Christian has meaning in their life, then similarly a devout muslim, or a devout Buddhist, Sikh, Hindu, or any other religion (sorry I don't know them all) will too.

Ironside

04-29-2008, 08:11

See: 7 plagues of Egypt, noah's flood, the massacre of the various tribes that had conflicts with the ancient hebrews.

If the christrian/jewish god was to be compared with a parent, its the kind of parent that kills the boy that dates his daughter.

And that's after bringing them together in the first place......

Know its not really to do with the discussion, particularly since I'm an atheist myself, but maybe its because in essence all religions are about giving meaning to lives that don't have it. Ergo, if a devout Christian has meaning in their life, then similarly a devout muslim, or a devout Buddhist, Sikh, Hindu, or any other religion (sorry I don't know them all) will too.

Well that's more of the atheist view of why we are drawn of making up gods and an afterlife. From a more religious viewpoint all others are heretics or pagans, not following the true path ( though there are some exceptions to that rule).

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

04-30-2008, 01:04

I concur. Jesus dis not have a physical body before his borth nor after his death.

But this raises the question for many: Was Jesus, prior to birth or after death, a self-aware entity seperate from the Father?

On this point, I say NO. I would argue that as Jesus "ascended to the father", his self-awareness became the Father's self-awareness. He became one with the Divine Mind through the Holy Spirit. I believe that this is what will happen when we die. This is the Kingdom of Heaven that Jesus spoke about. Many of Jesus' teachings centered on "who gets to go". It was clear that the essence of His parables was the unification of our individual spirit and will with that of the Holy Spirit. We must have that connection and live our lives with the will of God guiding us.

I've thought about this and there's not exactly a polite word for what you're saying. The technical word is Heresy. I don't mean to offend but from a traditionalist viewpoint that's what you're expounding, because you have broken down the Trinity and then fitted it back together.

You are saying that God the Son did not exist before his birth as the Messiah, that he is not a distinct entity and that he is not equal to the Father of the Holy Spirit. At the same time you seem to almost be suggesting that Jesus was seperate from God whilst on Earth and at the same time merely an extension of God's Will.

Have I got this right?

Adrian II

04-30-2008, 01:12

Have I got this right?OMG, he's gonne have Divinus burned. :stunned:

LittleGrizzly

04-30-2008, 01:14

Would God be emotional decision maker or a cold and calculated one ?

Edit: would god experience emotions at all...?

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

04-30-2008, 10:54

OMG, he's gonne have Divinus burned. :stunned:

What? Heresy is just going against established doctrine, sometimes that's a good thing.

Mooks

04-30-2008, 11:44

What? Heresy is just going against established doctrine, sometimes that's a good thing.

Jan Hus couldve said the same thing.

Would God be emotional decision maker or a cold and calculated one ?

Edit: would god experience emotions at all...?

Read the bible. He is a incredibly emotional guy. In fact, did you know that everytime you masturbate, god kills a kitten?

Divinus Arma

05-01-2008, 04:56

I've thought about this and there's not exactly a polite word for what you're saying. The technical word is Heresy. I don't mean to offend but from a traditionalist viewpoint that's what you're expounding, because you have broken down the Trinity and then fitted it back together.

Sulum est a haereticum ut quispiam.

The solitary claim to knowledge of God is as absurd as the Great Schism.

When I accepted Christianity, I did so with the understanding that Christianity is, in essence, very simple. I decided that I would refuse to be someone else's Christian. I can only be my own Christian. If that makes me someone else's heretic, than so be it.

A theologically-based existentialist perspective demands critical thought. As faith with out works is dead, so too is faith with out thought. I will love the Lord my God with all my heart, MIND, and soul. I will attempt to will my mind toward him and better understand his quality, in order that I may better serve him.

You are saying that God the Son did not exist before his birth as the Messiah, that he is not a distinct entity and that he is not equal to the Father of the Holy Spirit. At the same time you seem to almost be suggesting that Jesus was seperate from God whilst on Earth and at the same time merely an extension of God's Will.

Have I got this right?

What I am arguing is that the human mind of Jesus did not exist prior to the birth of Jesus. The Divine Will of Jesus existed eternal, but not the mind of Jesus. To have a human mind, with human limitations, Jesus required a physical human body and human brain. Without these physical limitations, Jesus would not have been limited to the mere human perspective of existence.

However, this is not to say that Jesus did not exist before his birth. He is God. God has always existed. God just wasn't limited by a human form.

edit: If anything, WE are the ones who have divided God into the Trinity. WE have created the Trinity. God exists in these forms but that does not mean they are "seperate but equal". We don't have three Gods. We have one. The Spirit of the Son is the Spirit of the Father. All three "parts" of the Trinity are equal and connected. Jesus isn't a "lesser God". He IS God.