Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

[Kepler]

Re: Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

Is that before or after he called your God 'Jeebus'?

Oh, for the love of Pete. "Jeebus" is not a mockery of Jesus. It's a stand-in term for any savior / God which, independent of whether it's real or not, is most likely completely misunderstood by its followers. It's from The Simpsons, for goodness' sake. Let's not have a Bob Gray situation here where failure to get a popular culture reference after 1958 leads to sanctimonious enmity.

We can call it "Mulhammad" if you like; people just won't get the reference as quickly.

[leswp1]

Re: Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

hmm...it seemed to me more like the enthusiasm of anyone who found something new and exciting in his life, eager to share the news about how wonderful it was, and why everyone else should try it too.

"Hey, I just saw the greatest movie ever! you should go see it too! here, I'll even buy you a ticket!"

To me that doesn't come across as "I'm right and you are wrong" but maybe we can just agree to disagree. I don't think that his "movie" is nearly as great as he makes it out to be either, but having dealt with plenty of zealots in my time, I see nothing to be gained by trying to dampen his enthusiasm. From the right perspective it can even be a bit endearing. It is a decent movie, far far better than "agree with me, or pay me tribute, or I'll kill you." I just happen to enjoy eastern cinema a lot more.

See below. I didn't know I was saying anything I was apparently saying. I have a parent with this skill. I am not fond of it.

So as you disagree with what I posted, you must believe:

Jesus is not God.

Jesus did not correct the OT as needed and took it without change.

Jesus Word as God is no more important than balance of the Bible.

By definition, His concepts don't really matter for Christians.

Faith does not improve lives by giving those strength, companionship and a code to live by.

Violence in faith as a percentage is large...and therefore, a causal correlation of faith to violence does exist.

No but you apparently want me to believe that. A little work on reading comprehension may be in order.

OK. I give up.

What he said. Until you read what is written, not what you have decided is being said, there is no point.

[FreshFish]

Re: Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

See below. I didn't know I was saying anything I was apparently saying.

yeah, I must now acknowledge I was wrong, given the posts subsequent to 1:44 PM EDST on May 11.....


It seems to me that a God that says only people who believe in Jesus as His Only Son can be saved is really petty and heartless, there are millions of people who never even get a chance to learn about him at all...why should they all be dammed through no fault of their own?

[5mn_Major]

Re: Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

Since you love the definition provided in Wikipedia, let's read a bit further in the article, shall we?

"Christianity, like other religions, has adherents whose beliefs and biblical interpretations vary. Christianity regards the biblical canon, the Old Testament and the New Testament, as the inspired word of God. The traditional view of inspiration is that God worked through human authors so that what they produced was what God wished to communicate. The Greek word referring to inspiration in 2 Timothy 3:16 is theopneustos, which literally means "God-breathed"."

The Bible, OT and NT alike, is considered canon for Christians. If the Old Testament is what God wished to communicate, and God is infallible, why would it need later correction?

Who knows why God kept some of the OT, adjusted/prioritized other parts, and completely changed other parts. But He did - there are many passages that resulted in the those outcomes. Inspired as defined is 'filling (someone) with the urge or ability to do something'. That's a far cry from having God deliver the content directly...as was done in the form of Jesus. I'm guessing as the content was only inspired, it benefited from clarification.

[leswp1]

Re: Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

yeah, I must now acknowledge I was wrong, given the posts subsequent to 1:44 PM EDST on May 11.....


It seems to me that a God that says only people who believe in Jesus as His Only Son can be saved is really petty and heartless, there are millions of people who never even get a chance to learn about him at all...why should they all be dammed through no fault of their own?

Can't remember the Book but the Apostles and the early church argue about whether it matters if you are a Gentile and not to recieve Grace and the conclusion was no. Remember Gentiles were non-believers. Went along with whether you needed to be circumcised to belong. (always makes me cringe). The Pope seems to be cool with the more Grace part.

[joecct]

Re: Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

Can't remember the Book but the Apostles and the early church argue about whether it matters if you are a Gentile and not to recieve Grace and the conclusion was no. Remember Gentiles were non-believers. Went along with whether you needed to be circumcised to belong. (always makes me cringe). The Pope seems to be cool with the more Grace part.

The RC Church says, "Outside the Church, there is no salvation."

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

"Outside the Church there is no salvation"

846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.

847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:

Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.

848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."

The whole thing in context

[St. Clown]

Re: Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

That seems to be at odds with what Pope Francis has said since taking his office.

[joecct]

That seems to be at odds with what Pope Francis has said since taking his office.

Which is why a lot of Catholics are scratching their heads.

But then again, His Holiness is a Jesuit. Jesuits have been a headache for centuries. Every once in a while the Pope has to chastise the order.

[Kepler]

Re: Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

Which is why a lot of Catholics are scratching their heads.

But then again, His Holiness is a Jesuit. Jesuits have been a headache for centuries. Every once in a while the Pope has to chastise the order.

Speaking of...

[joecct]

Speaking of...

See what I mean? But if you want to make a problem go away, commission a study.

[unofan]

Re: Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

Jesuits have been a headache for centuries. Every once in a while the Pope has to chastise the order.

Fundamentalists don't like Academics? You don't say...

[joecct]

Fundamentalists don't like Academics? You don't say...

No, I didn't.

[leswp1]

Re: Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

That seems to be at odds with what Pope Francis has said since taking his office.

Which is why a lot of Catholics are scratching their heads.

But then again, His Holiness is a Jesuit. Jesuits have been a headache for centuries. Every once in a while the Pope has to chastise the order.

This is something that confuses me. Isn't the role of the Pope to guide the people and isn't he supposed to be the mouth of God? (this is a real question, I am not a Catholic). If this is true is he only infallible when he says what people like? Seems to me he is very much like the Prophets in the Bible who tell people they have lost their way and then the way to correct it. His Holiness seems to be able to read the Bible and follow the Word better than any Pope in my memory. He says a lot of uncomfortable things and calls people to task for trying to exclude people rather than reel them in.

If Doctrine is given by God and the Pope (who is infallible) sets Doctrine then what he says is right and a correction to previous Doctrine. Not all Doctrine has survived thru the centuries. Previous Popes have altered Doctrine and even apologized for it on occasion. From the outside it seems the people who have the most to lose, worked their way up to a position of power, and are the least Christ like, are the ones who are protesting the loudest.

[disclaimer] I admit that being Lutheran skews my views. Luther was the guy that said the Church lost its way because it was deviating from Scripture and the Doctrine was created for gain rather than to follow Christ. It is also possible that the only thing I see is connected to the leadership doing things that are unscrupulous. The quiet ones may be doing the right thing.

[Kepler]

Re: Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

A nice piece addressing Creationists' false arguments -- whether made intentionally or out of ignorance -- and correcting the myriad untrue assumptions underlying them.

I have had experiences similar to the author when talking to Creationists, several of who I work with. To be fair, these are not Young Earth Creationists, who other Creationists consider out on the lunatic fringe (!), but just people who have an incoherent or just plain incorrect idea of what evolution is because, as the author points out, their experience of it comes from pastors who set up a strawman to demolish.

It is very hard to argue with somebody whose difference of opinion keeps going back all the way to first principles and even beyond to what constitutes a theory of knowledge at all. It's like having a rap battle with somebody who speaks a different language: neither of you is really interacting with the other, so at best it is competing soliloquies that can't be measured against each other. I generally drop the conversation since there seems to be no way "in" to get the interlocutor to reconsider a premise -- that is after all what axioms are, and axioms tend to be autobiographical rather than rational (for both of us). Perhaps (most likely) they feel the same way about me.

It is still a VERY frustrating experience though, even when both people are sincere and honestly trying to make themselves understood and to grasp what the other is saying.

[Bob Gray]

Re: Religion Thread: That's Me In the Corner...

It is still a VERY frustrating experience though, even when both people are sincere and honestly trying to make themselves understood and to grasp what the other is saying.

Face it. In this country when one can even get this far with another American with a very different understanding of something, we're doing much better than most of what goes on. So consider yourself lucky in these conversations.

Like this whole transgender thing. People might as well be from different planets their understandings are so fundamentally different. I see no hope for the future of our nation as a cohesive people.