Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Discuss the Christian Faith.
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

I for one am very sad by the fact that Jesus has been so poorly represented and is still shamefully claimed to be represented by people that both don't practice his teachings and know absolutely nothing about what it means to be a real Christian.

I am very glad that many stand in opposition to the false people that represent themselves as Christians, but unfortunately most who claim to be Christians will fail to hear the reproof that is being given to them, because while those who stand in opposition are correct to oppose, they fail to help the deceived see what they are blind to.

Telling someone they are wrong does not help them understand how they are wrong and while Christianity is in total err today, Jesus was loved and embraced by the common people: it was the religious people and those in Government that stood against Jesus: because Jesus preached against their practices.

So what caused the problem to create the abhorrence known today as the Christian church? It was the embracing of the so-called Apostle Paul and his teachings. Jesus was trying to enlighten his followers to be committed to the practice of his teachings, while Paul was a common Pharisee who was all about intellectual dogmas and thus the church today, as followers of Paul, have created a belief system which is predicated upon intellectual acceptance of believed facts: rather then upon the changing of ones practices; "love your enemies" is a nice philosophy, but if one is not committed to practicing it it is an empty ideology. Jesus actually practiced his teachings and any who claim to be followers of his and fail to practice what he taught are deceiving themselves (this basically includes almost all proclaimed Christians, as they believe they don't have to obey Jesus' teachings: despite what Jesus clearly stated to the contrary).

Luk 6:46 And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?

Luk 6:47 Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will shew you to whom he is like:

Luk 6:48 He is like a man which built an house, and digged deep, and laid the foundation on a rock: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and could not shake it: for it was founded upon a rock.

Luk 6:49 But he that heareth, and doeth not, is like a man that without a foundation built an house upon the earth; against which the stream did beat vehemently, and immediately it fell; and the ruin of that house was great.



Joh 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

Joh 14:24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.



Joh 10:26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.

Joh 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

Joh 10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish,



Joh 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

Joh 14:24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.



Joh 12:47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.

Joh 12:48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.



Mat 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Mat 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

Mat 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Mat 7:24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:



Joh 7:16 Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.

Joh 7:17 If any man will do his will (Obey Jesus' doctrine which he claims is God's words), he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
User avatar
jones jones
Posts: 6601
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 7:30 am

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by jones jones »

Sheep ... Yeah they follow don't they?

Saw this joke online about some sheep throwing a party. One says to the other: "This is a terrible party. Everything is so disorganised."

It looks up and sees a dog entering the front door. "Oh thank god ... a Border Collie!"
"…I hate how I don’t feel real enough unless people are watching." — Chuck Palahniuk, Invisible Monsters
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

[QUOTE=jones jones;1450987]Sheep ... Yeah they follow don't they?



Sheep do follow, truth be known almost everything we have learned we have learned by others, so we are all sheep to some degree. The question is: who are we following.

The problem is that the churched today are taught that obedience to Jesus' teachings is not only not necessary, but that salvation based upon anything, but abstract belief, is legalism: totally contrary to what Jesus clearly taught.

The only thing that is consistent about today's Christian theology is that there is no consistency. I spent years in their churches believing and propagating the junk they hold to and thankfully I now see clear enough to warn people about the hypocrisy they hold to. Jesus called the religious people and leaders of his day the blind leaders of the blind and this clearly describes today's professing Christians.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
Mark Aspam
Posts: 668
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:00 am

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by Mark Aspam »

Sheep, can you be more SPECIFIC here? I don't doubt your sincerity, but you are "all over the place".

How about starting with 4 or 5 SPECIFIC examples of how you feel that the Church has "gone wrong". I mean REALLY specific.

Then, if you are willing to do that, let us know how you think that they could, in each example, correct themselves - SPECIFICALLY.
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

Mark Aspam;1451023 wrote: Sheep, can you be more SPECIFIC here? I don't doubt your sincerity, but you are "all over the place".

How about starting with 4 or 5 SPECIFIC examples of how you feel that the Church has "gone wrong". I mean REALLY specific.

Then, if you are willing to do that, let us know how you think that they could, in each example, correct themselves - SPECIFICALLY.


Hey Mark, the main problem I see with the church is that they believe, and are propagating, abstract faith as the bases for salvation and this belief claims a man is righteous without the need to abide and follow the teachings of Jesus. Because of this men are both lacking clear cut direction as to what they need to do to purge themselves from sin: in order to truly be redeemed from it.

Jesus stated that he came to set men free and his Jewish disciples responded that they where Abraham's children and had never been enslaved to any, to which Jesus responded: "whoever sins is a servant of sin" and that he came to free man from being its servant through abiding in his teachings. I know what I have stated goes against probably everything you have been taught and believe, but yet there is no other way to properly interpret Jesus words in John 8:31-36.

Joh 8:31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;

Joh 8:32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

Joh 8:33 They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?

Joh 8:34 Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.

Joh 8:35 And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever.

Joh 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

Let's start here and once we have come to some sort of agreement on this, then we can explore further. But this is clearly the main problem I see that is causing the rest of the churches err. Correct this and the rest is easily fixed.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
Mark Aspam
Posts: 668
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:00 am

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by Mark Aspam »

sheep;1451030 wrote: Hey Mark, the main problem I see with the church is that they believe, and are propagating, abstract faith as the bass for salvation and this belief claims a man is righteous without the need to abide and follow the teachings of Jesus. Because of this men are both lacking clear cut direction as to what they need to do to purge themselves from sin: in order to truly be redeemed from it.

Let's start here and once we have so sort of agreement on this, then we can explore further. But this is clearly the main problem I see that is causing the rest of the churches [to] err. Correct this and the rest is easily fixed.OK, I've highlighted only your first and last paragraph because the rest is just commentary.

Name a Christian denomination or an individual Christian Church that "propagates" that, and give a link to a website of such a church or denomination, especially if it contains a 'statement of principles' that supports your point of view.

I'll wait right here for you.
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

Notice the following Question asked on Catholic.com http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/ ... -salvation

Why does the Church teach that works can obtain salvation?

Why does the Roman Catholic Church teach the doctrine of "works righteousness," that through good works one can earn salvation?

Answer

The Catholic Church has never taught such a doctrine and, in fact, has constantly condemned the notion that men can earn or merit salvation. Catholic soteriology (salvation theology) is rooted in apostolic Tradition and Scripture and says that it is only by God's grace--completely unmerited by works--that one is saved.

Jesus on the other hand clearly states that salvation is based upon repentance (changing One's thinking and going in a different direction): Mat 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

This is from wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sola_fide

Sola fide (Latin: by faith alone), also historically known as the doctrine of justification by faith alone, is a Christian theological doctrine that distinguishes most Protestant denominations from Catholicism, Orthodox Christianity, and some in the Restoration Movement.

The doctrine of sola fide or "by faith alone" asserts God's pardon for guilty sinners is granted to and received through faith, conceived as excluding all "works," alone.

Baptist church proclaim http://baptistdistinctives.org/articles ... ith-alone/

Salvation by Grace Through Faith Alone

“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves:

it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast.”

(Ephesians 2:8-9)

Casual conversations, movies, television shows, comic cartoons all indicate that the popular concept of salvation seems to be this: When a person dies, God weighs the good deeds and the bad. If the good outweighs the bad, the person gets into heaven. If the bad outweighs the good, the person goes to hell. (Sometimes hell is not even in the picture.) In other words, human effort and work pave the road to either heaven or hell.

The Bible’s portrayal of salvation is entirely different. The Bible clearly teaches that all have sinned (Romans 3:23) and that the penalty for sin is eternal death. However, God by his grace has provided a way for sin to be forgiven, hell avoided and heaven gained. That way is faith in his Son, Jesus Christ (Romans 6:23).

Salvation, according to the Bible, is solely by grace and faith, not by human effort or works (Ephesians 2:8-9). While not denying the value of good works, throughout our history Baptists have proclaimed the truth that salvation is only by grace through faith.



Anglican teachings on justification http://christianity.about.com/gi/o.htm? ... 39Articles

XI. Of the Justification of Man.

We are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by Faith, and not for our own works or deservings. Wherefore, that we are justified by Faith only, is a most wholesome Doctrine, and very full of comfort, as more largely expressed in the Homily of Justification.

Here is the Methodist statement of faith http://christianity.about.com/gi/o.htm? ... mid%3D1650

Article IX—Of the Justification of Man



We are accounted righteous before God only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, by faith, and not for our own works or deservings. Wherefore, that we are justified by faith, only, is a most wholesome doctrine, and very full of comfort.

Here is a couple of denominations that are proclaiming salvation by faith alone, but this is just a start I have to go to bed as it is 6:10 am and i worked until 4 am and am very tired.

If one just does a quick search on "saved by faith alone" the clarity of the both the magnitude of this doctrine raises its ugly head, as well if one looks into denominations and what they believe about salvation there is not hardly 2 of them that can agree about what constitutes the bases of salvation.

By God's grace I'll respond to your remarks tomorrow.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

I tried to post a message but somehow it is not here... I have to get some sleep as I worked all night. I will try and respond within the next 12 hours.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
Mark Aspam
Posts: 668
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:00 am

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by Mark Aspam »

sheep;1451035 wrote: I tried to post a message but somehow it is not here... I have to get some sleep as I worked all night. I will try and respond within the next 12 hours.Sleep for sheep! Absolutely! No rush, and please do not get the impression that I am hounding you here, that's not my intention at all.

It's just that the complaints you have made against modern Christianity aren't very specific. I'm a Catholic, my wife is Jewish, we have lots of Protestant friends, some of whom are more devout than others (as are some Jews and Catholics), but I don't know of any specific Church in my area or any specific denomination that would seem to fit your analysis of present-day Christianity.

That's why I've asked you for more specificity. I'm not claiming that you're wrong, I'd just like some specific examples.
User avatar
jones jones
Posts: 6601
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 7:30 am

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by jones jones »

Maybe it would be more appropriate to ask: "Where did the Church go right!"
"…I hate how I don’t feel real enough unless people are watching." — Chuck Palahniuk, Invisible Monsters
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

Mark Aspam;1451031 wrote: OK, I've highlighted only your first and last paragraph because the rest is just commentary.

Name a Christian denomination or an individual Christian Church that "propagates" that, and give a link to a website of such a church or denomination, especially if it contains a 'statement of principles' that supports your point of view.

I'll wait right here for you.


It appears that I can't use links in my posts. I will try posting the website name and separate the (.) and the (com) and hopefully you can find the webpages. You can always google the quote and hopefully you can find the pages easily that way.

The doctrine of justification by faith alone without works is described here at" en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Sola_fide remove the space between the . and the org.



These quotes are form catholic. com

Why does the Church teach that works can obtain salvation?



Why does the Roman Catholic Church teach the doctrine of "works righteousness," that through good works one can earn salvation?

Answer

The Catholic Church has never taught such a doctrine and, in fact, has constantly condemned the notion that men can earn or merit salvation. Catholic soteriology (salvation theology) is rooted in apostolic Tradition and Scripture and says that it is only by God's grace--completely unmerited by works--that one is saved.

Now while I found this on catholic. com I found a complete contrary statement on the same website...

Doesn't John 3:16 clearly indicate that faith alone is necessary for salvation?



Full Question

In John 3:16 Jesus says, "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whomsoever believes in him shall not perish but have everlasting life." It's clear that Scripture rejects the Catholic view of salvation by faith plus works. It teaches salvation by faith alone. All you have to do is believe, period.

Answer

First of all, the Catholic view of salvation is not faith plus works, if by works you mean purely human efforts to win God's favor.

Catholics believe in salvation by grace alone, yet grace must not be resisted, either before justification (by remaining in unbelief) or after (by engaging in serious sin). Read carefully 1 Corinthians 6, Galatians 5, and Ephesians 5.

Second, the Bible nowhere uses the expressions "justification by faith alone" or "salvation by faith alone." The first was directly the invention of Luther; the second his by implication. Luther inserted "alone" into the German translation of Romans 3:28 to give credence to his new doctrine.

But your question deals with John 3:16. Yes, this passage does speak of the saving power of faith, but in no sense does it diminish the role of obedience to Christ in the process of getting to heaven.

In fact, it assumes it. Just as Fundamentalists overlook the rest of the chapter in connection with what being born of water and the Holy Spirit really means--they ignore the water part, which refers to baptism--they also overlook the context when interpreting Christ's words about obtaining eternal life in John 3:16.

In John 3:36 we are told, "Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever disobeys the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God remains upon him."



Again on the same website (catholic. com) it says

We Can Work It Out

By: Tim Staples

James 2:24 is remarkably clear: "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone." Yet millions of Christians teach the opposite: They claim that we are "justified by faith alone"—saying good works are unnecessary for Christians in the process of justification.

This misconception is rooted in the misinterpretation of a few key texts, such as Romans 3:28: "For we hold that a man is justified by faith apart from works of law." Romans 4:5 is another: "And to one who does not work but trusts him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness." On the surface, St. Paul seems to be saying works are not necessary for our justification or salvation in any sense, but that is not the case when we examine the context of these passages. Not only would this interpretation contradict the words of James 2, but it would also contradict Paul himself.

Work in Christ

Paul made very clear in Romans 2:6-8 that good works are necessary for attaining eternal life, at least for those capable of performing them: "For he will render to every man according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; but for those who are factious and do not obey the truth, but obey wickedness, there will be wrath and fury."

I know the churches official stance is that works are necessary for salvation, but hopefully the contrary scholarly views on catholic. com will show how heated the debate is within the catholic church... But don't worry I will add official church positions now.

Here is a link to about. com which deals with the 7 following denominations teachings on salvation being by either faith or works (christianity.about. com/od/denominationscomparison/ss/comparebeliefs2_2. htm (remove the spaces)). you can find links on the page to the churches official documents and stances.

Anglican/Episcopal - "We are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by Faith, and not for our own works or deservings. Wherefore, that we are justified by Faith only, is a most wholesome Doctrine..." 39 Articles Anglican Communion

Assembly of God view - "Salvation is received through repentance toward God and faith toward the Lord Jesus Christ. By the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, being justified by grace through faith, man becomes an heir of God, according to the hope of eternal life."

Baptist view- "Salvation involves the redemption of the whole man, and is offered freely to all who accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour, who by His own blood obtained eternal redemption for the believer ... There is no salvation apart from personal faith in Jesus Christ as Lord."

Lutheran view- "Faith in Christ is the only way for men to obtain personal reconciliation with God, that is, forgiveness of sins ..."

Methodist view- "We are accounted righteous before God only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, by faith, and not for our own works or deservings. Wherefore, that we are justified by faith, only..."

Presbyterian view - "Presbyterians believe God has offered us salvation because of God's loving nature. It is not a right or a privilege to be earned by being "good enough," ... we are all saved solely by the grace of God ...Out of the greatest possible love and compassion God reached out to us and redeemed us through Jesus Christ, the only one who was ever without sin. Through Jesus' death and resurrection God triumphed over sin."

Roman Catholic view - Salvation is received by virtue of the sacrament of Baptism. It may be lost by mortal sin and may be regained by Penance.



Actually here is another catholic ranting of salvation by faith alone at anglefire. com

angelfire. com/home/protestantchallenges/faithalone. html (remove spaces)

Faith Alone:

Have you been taught that Catholics work their way to Heaven?

Another misunderstanding.



Click here:16 SOBERING QUESTIONS:

DISCOVER THE VERSES OFTEN OVERLOOKED IN NON-CATHOLIC CHURCHES AND SEMINARIES:

Return to Homepage "A Biblical Case for the Catholic Faith"

Faith Alone (Sola Fide):

Have you been taught that Catholics

“Work their way to Heaven?”

Many modern Christians believe that Catholic theology teaches that we are saved by doing “good works”, or that Catholics “work their way to heaven.” Nothing could be further from the truth. This is another example of the misunderstandings about the apostolic Catholic Faith. The Catholic Faith teaches, as the Holy Scriptures teach, that we are saved “by grace through faith” and that salvation is a free gift. The Faith has always believed this. The Christian Faith has always taught that one cannot work one's way to heaven.



I, or you, can find tons more denominations and their beliefs on this subject, but one really should ask: "why is there so much confusion on this issue?" The answer is simple... Paul's teachings, when scrutinized, contradict themselves and Jesus' teachings have not been the main and only standard to settle this issue.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
Mark Aspam
Posts: 668
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:00 am

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by Mark Aspam »

sheep;1451061 wrote: 1. Roman Catholic view - Salvation is received by virtue of the sacrament of Baptism. It may be lost by mortal sin and may be regained by Penance.

2. Actually here is another catholic ranting of salvation by faith alone at anglefire.Well, I'm still not sure that you understood my request.

1. Don't know where you found that, but that is EXACTLY the RC view, and of course, very easy to understand.

2. "Ranting" is a good description, and by the way, as a general rule, though there are probably exceptions, angelfire is a poor choice of venues for religious material. The anonymous poster seems to be attempting to reconcile RC with Protestant theology and not succeeding.



But I still don't see where any of this has much to do with your assertion that the Church - by which I assume that you mean Christianity in general - has "gone wrong". That is why I asked you for SPECIFIC examples, which you have not provided.

Even the Gospels themselves contradict one another in many instances, and there are several older threads here that discuss that.
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

Mark Aspam;1451062 wrote: Well, I'm still not sure that you understood my request.

1. Don't know where you found that, but that is EXACTLY the RC view, and of course, very easy to understand.

2. "Ranting" is a good description, and by the way, as a general rule, though there are probably exceptions, angelfire is a poor choice of venues for religious material. The anonymous poster seems to be attempting to reconcile RC with Protestant theology and not succeeding.



But I still don't see where any of this has much to do with your assertion that the Church - by which I assume that you mean Christianity in general - has "gone wrong". That is why I asked you for SPECIFIC examples, which you have not provided.

Even the Gospels themselves contradict one another in many instances, and there are several older threads here that discuss that.


I think that you will find that while denominations might have certain stances on issues, that those who are a part of those organizations are influenced and believe/practice very different beliefs. I think the real issue is: what is main beliefs of the average person that claims to be Christan.

I've been in many churches from Catholic, which I grew up as a part of, to evangelical, Pentecostal, baptist, church of Christ, seventh day adventist, methodist and once even to a Mormon church, and I have found that while they may have differences about certain doctrinal issues, most of them believe the same underlying doctrine that salvation is based upon one's views and acceptance of Jesus' sacrifice for their sins, as opposed to obedience to the Lordship of Christ and abiding in his teachings. This is what I have found anyway.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
Mark Aspam
Posts: 668
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:00 am

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by Mark Aspam »

sheep;1451063 wrote: ...most of them believe the same underlying doctrine that...

A. ...salvation is based upon one's views and acceptance of Jesus' sacrifice for their sins, as opposed to...

B. ...obedience to the Lordship of Christ and abiding in his teachings. This is what I have found anyway.Ah! Why didn't you say so in the first place?

Now I understand, and I will go with B. I will leave A to the Lutherans, and the various other denoms derived therefrom. I disagree only with your assertion that MOST Christians go with A, I'd say that most go with B, beginning with a billion Catholics.

So, in my case, my wife believes in the Torah, I believe in the Sermon on the Mount, which is straight out of the Torah. I guess that's why we've never had a serious disagreement over religion.
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

Mark Aspam;1451068 wrote: Ah! Why didn't you say so in the first place?

Now I understand, and I will go with B. I will leave A to the Lutherans, and the various other denoms derived therefrom. I disagree only with your assertion that MOST Christians go with A, I'd say that most go with B, beginning with a billion Catholics.

So, in my case, my wife believes in the Torah, I believe in the Sermon on the Mount, which is straight out of the Torah. I guess that's why we've never had a serious disagreement over religion.


Here is a challenge for you: the next time your in a catholic church, ask the priest: what is the the bases of salvation; I would almost be willing to bet that you will not hear him say: being committed to purge one of sin through the embracing of the doctrines of Christ. Ask your catholic friends also what the bases of salvation is, my bet is you will have a differant answer from each of them.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
Mark Aspam
Posts: 668
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:00 am

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by Mark Aspam »

sheep;1451076 wrote: Here is a challenge for you: the next time your in a catholic church, ask the priest: what is the the bases of salvation; I would almost be willing to bet that you will not hear him say: being committed to purge one of sin through the embracing of the doctrines of Christ. Ask your catholic friends also what the bases of salvation is, my bet is you will have a differant answer from each of them.Well, first of all, you are confusing bases with basis. Bases are what I hope a lot of Cubs get on in Pittsburgh this afternoon, their season opener starts in less than an hour.

Secondly, you would lose that bet, he would not say anything like that, he would say something like "remaining in a state of [God's sanctifying] grace", which would include keeping the commandments etc. And any knowledgeable Catholic would say pretty much the same.

But then you already stated that earlier: The RC position is that we are born in original sin, which is remitted by Baptism. We then receive God's sanctifying grace, which is lost only by SERIOUS sin (walking on the grass or parking overtime doesn't cut it), and regained by making a sincere confession and asking God for the grace to resist temptation in the future. Pretty much what any Catholic would say. That is the BASIS of RC teaching. The actual words would vary but the basic idea would be the same.
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

Mark Aspam;1451077 wrote: Well, first of all, you are confusing bases with basis. Bases are what I hope a lot of Cubs get on in Pittsburgh this afternoon, their season opener starts in less than an hour.

Secondly, you would lose that bet, he would not say anything like that, he would say something like "remaining in a state of [God's sanctifying] grace", which would include keeping the commandments etc. And any knowledgeable Catholic would say pretty much the same.

But then you already stated that earlier: The RC position is that we are born in original sin, which is remitted by Baptism. We then receive God's sanctifying grace, which is lost only by SERIOUS sin (walking on the grass or parking overtime doesn't cut it), and regained by making a sincere confession and asking God for the grace to resist temptation in the future. Pretty much what any Catholic would say. That is the BASIS of RC teaching. The actual words would vary but the basic idea would be the same.


As I mentioned before, denominations official position and peoples beliefs vary. The commandments of Jesus have nothing to do with the 10 commandments, so if your referring to Jesus' commandments then okay.

P.S. gl on the bases
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
Mark Aspam
Posts: 668
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:00 am

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by Mark Aspam »

sheep;1451080 wrote: As I mentioned before, denominations official position and peoples beliefs vary. The commandments of Jesus have nothing to do with the 10 commandments, so if your referring to Jesus' commandments then okay.

P.S. gl on the basesPirates 1, Cubs 0 in ten innings. A very boring game. Now the Cubs will not be able to sell beer at their games, because they lost the opener! (OLD baseball joke.)

Sheep, you may find this hard to believe, but I have never heard the phrase "Commandments of Jesus" until today. Never in my life, and I'm 73. When I google the phrase I find a dozen or so Fundamentalist Christian websites listing, mainly, what most Christians would refer to as Christ's TEACHINGS. And those have MUCH to do with the ten commandments of Moses.

I'm pretty sure, and please correct me if I'm wrong, that the only place that Christ is quoted as referring to "MY Commandments" is in John's gospel, and that is easily understood, as the entire theme of that book is Christ's DIVINITY ("In the beginning was the Word..."), something that the earlier gospels pretty much leave to the reader's imagination.

And Christ's divinity is, of course, probably the greatest barrier between Christianity and Judaism. Was then and remains so today.
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

Mark Aspam;1451092 wrote: Pirates 1, Cubs 0 in ten innings. A very boring game. Now the Cubs will not be able to sell beer at their games, because they lost the opener! (OLD baseball joke.)

Sheep, you may find this hard to believe, but I have never heard the phrase "Commandments of Jesus" until today. Never in my life, and I'm 73. When I google the phrase I find a dozen or so Fundamentalist Christian websites listing, mainly, what most Christians would refer to as Christ's TEACHINGS. And those have MUCH to do with the ten commandments of Moses.

I'm pretty sure, and please correct me if I'm wrong, that the only place that Christ is quoted as referring to "MY Commandments" is in John's gospel, and that is easily understood, as the entire theme of that book is Christ's DIVINITY ("In the beginning was the Word..."), something that the earlier gospels pretty much leave to the reader's imagination.

And Christ's divinity is, of course, probably the greatest barrier between Christianity and Judaism. Was then and remains so today.


May I ask you if you speak more than 1 language fluently: before I make my next post in response to your last post.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
Mark Aspam
Posts: 668
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:00 am

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by Mark Aspam »

sheep;1451095 wrote: May I ask you if you speak more than 1 language fluently: before I make my next post in response to your last post.Well, actually, no response is necessary, I thought that I kinda sorta wrapped it with my previous post. You and I are not going to solve the problem - if it really is a problem - of religious differences.

Yes, I'm bilingual - and your point is...?
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

Mark Aspam;1451098 wrote: Well, actually, no response is necessary, I thought that I kinda sorta wrapped it with my previous post. You and I are not going to solve the problem - if it really is a problem - of religious differences.

Yes, I'm bilingual - and your point is...?


I want to make the suggestion that the writers of the gosples knew Jesus was the Christ and that as the Christ/Messiah/Ruler/King (All for of those words being exactly equal and representing each other) that Jesus was setting up his kingdom: the kingdom of God; and every kingdom has both a king and rules/commands and Jesus' teachings are his commands. When Jesus was ascending he told his followers "All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world."

In the book of Matthew while Jesus was preaching the sermon on the mount, these words are recorded Mat 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Mat 5:20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Mat 5:21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:

Mat 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

Notice 2 things, Jesus says these, as oppose to the: he is clearly referring to the ones that he is about to lay out. Second, that Jesus took 1 (in the verses above, although he does it 3 times in the chapter) of the ten commandments (thou shalt not kill) and raised the standard: as he said unless your righteousness surpassed that of the scribes and Pharisees you would not enter into heaven.

If one goes into Matthew 5:17, using the Greek manuscripts, you will see that the English translators give a very bad translation of what Jesus actually said. The Greek actual states, that Jesus said, don't think I came to disassemble, or loosen/free you (as oppose to destroy: which is the English word used) from the law (now the word used for law is an interesting one, it comes from a root word that means "grazing pasture"), so Jesus is saying I didn't come to free you from your obligation to spiritually graze, then he continues to say, i didn't come to free you from it, but I came to fulfill it (the word fulfill is a terrible translation from the Greek, as the word fulfill means to complete and the actual word used means to cram in more). When one understands what Jesus actually meant in 5:17, we see that the rest of the verses in Matthew chapter 5 correlate with 5:17: as oppose to how the English translators wrote it.

Lastly in 1 John we have these words written:

1Jn 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

1Jn 2:2 And he (Jesus) is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

1Jn 2:3 And hereby we do know that we know him (Jesus:), if we keep his (Jesus') commandments.

1Jn 2:4 He that saith, I know him (Jesus), and keepeth not his (Jesus') commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

1Jn 2:5 But whoso keepeth his (Jesus') word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him (Jesus).

1Jn 2:6 He that saith he abideth in him (Jesus) ought himself also so to walk, even as he (Jesus) walked.

When one understands that Jesus is the Christ/King and that the words he spoke are the terms of being a part of the kingdom of God (God's kingdom which Jesus Rules), the New Covenant (Contract) now takes form.

May God richly bless you.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
User avatar
AnneBoleyn
Posts: 6632
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by AnneBoleyn »

So, simple question, simple answer, sheep. What does Mark knowing 2 languages have to do with anything? If you are saying there are different translations for different.........................what the heck are you saying?
User avatar
Hope6
Posts: 11525
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:30 pm
Location: Virginia

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by Hope6 »

It's no joking matter, it's very sad how badly the Christian faith is represented sometimes. Some people who claim to be Christians have no right to do so because they certainly don't follow Jesus teachings. They give the rest of us a bad name.
User avatar
AnneBoleyn
Posts: 6632
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by AnneBoleyn »

Hope, you can say that about anyone. The fact is, we represent ourselves. Here in NYC, some of the worst landlords are ultra-orthodox Jews, the Hasidics, the kind who wear black constantly, long beards, hats & under the hats, yarmulkes. They pray all the time & their money-grubbing, anti-humanistic ways are like a caricature. They are obscene human beings, I despise them. They represent their own greed, not Judaism.

Jesus was a man of peace & it is a shame,that some "Christians" do not represent Christianity. A person represents themselves, no matter who they claim to represent. You can be proud you represent true teachings, that's all you can do is be a good example. People change themselves when they feel the need.
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

AnneBoleyn;1451103 wrote: So, simple question, simple answer, sheep. What does Mark knowing 2 languages have to do with anything? If you are saying there are different translations for different.........................what the heck are you saying?


If he didn't I would have to explain the problems that are associated with translating between languages, but since he does there was no need for that. The reason there are over 500 English bibles is because of the difficulty associated with translating between languages, but if you are not fluent in 2 languages you may not understand that.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

Hope6;1451104 wrote: It's no joking matter, it's very sad how badly the Christian faith is represented sometimes. Some people who claim to be Christians have no right to do so because they certainly don't follow Jesus teachings. They give the rest of us a bad name.


I think the real problem is that people have been confused by Paul's teachings, which since they were penned left others disputing them. I honestly feel if we never had Paul's writings, but rather the gospels alone, we would not be having this discussion.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12366
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by LarsMac »

sheep;1451110 wrote: I think the real problem is that people have been confused by Paul's teachings, which since they were penned left others disputing them. I honestly feel if we never had Paul's writings, but rather the gospels alone, we would not be having this discussion.


I am pretty certain that if Paul had known that some group of clowns were going to gather up his letters and turn them into some holy text, he would have abandoned his pen long before setting sail for Rome.
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

LarsMac;1451124 wrote: I am pretty certain that if Paul had known that some group of clowns were going to gather up his letters and turn them into some holy text, he would have abandoned his pen long before setting sail for Rome.


I mentioned your post to my wife and she responded the way I did. I think Paul still would have. But I think if Paul would have known his teachings would have stopped people from obeying the teachings of Christ, then I agree: he would have never lifted his writing instrument.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

Mark Aspam;1451062 wrote: Well, I'm still not sure that you understood my request.

1. Don't know where you found that, but that is EXACTLY the RC view, and of course, very easy to understand.

2. "Ranting" is a good description, and by the way, as a general rule, though there are probably exceptions, angelfire is a poor choice of venues for religious material. The anonymous poster seems to be attempting to reconcile RC with Protestant theology and not succeeding.



But I still don't see where any of this has much to do with your assertion that the Church - by which I assume that you mean Christianity in general - has "gone wrong". That is why I asked you for SPECIFIC examples, which you have not provided.

Even the Gospels themselves contradict one another in many instances, and there are several older threads here that discuss that.


Mark, yes I am talking about Christianity in general.

If one turns on the T.V. you hear televangelists preaching easy believism salvation.

Listen to the former president of the United States (George w. Bush Jr.) and you see a man that claim to be a Christian (follower of Jesus') and doesn't follow the teachings of Jesus.

From the majority of people that I have queried, on what it means to be a Christian, they don't believe that they must follow the teachings of Jesus to make heaven.

The Catholic Church is one of the wealthiest organizations in the world and yet Jesus stated "woe to you that are rich you have received your consolation".

Maybe this was the response you are looking for, but the real problem is that people don't have clarity on the gospel of Jesus and thus they don't know what to believe/follow and the results are only the byproduct of they underlying root problem: their lack of clarity regarding the gospel.

While you believe that most Catholics know that obeying the teachings of Jesus is the foundation of one's salvation, I don't for a second believe you are even close to being right.

I hope this is a sufficient response to the question you are/were asking.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
Mark Aspam
Posts: 668
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:00 am

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by Mark Aspam »

sheep;1451401 wrote: 1. If one turns on the T.V. you hear televangelists preaching easy believism salvation.

2. The Catholic Church is one of the wealthiest organizations in the world and yet Jesus stated "woe to you that are rich you have received your consolation".

3. Maybe this was the response you are looking for, but the real problem is that people don't have clarity on the gospel of Jesus and thus they don't know what to believe/follow and the results are only the byproduct of they underlying root problem: their lack of clarity regarding the gospel.

4. I hope this is a sufficient response to the question you are/were asking.1. I have never turned on the teevee for that purpose. I DID watch Bishop Fulton J.Sheen's weekly show on the DuMont network in the 1950's, we graduated from the same high school, he in 1917 (as I recall), I 41 years later. He discussed MANY aspects of Christianity, it is a multi-faceted religion, a concept that seems to have eluded you.

2. Hilarious! The last I heard, the estimated resources of the RCC were in the range of 15-16 billion dollars. That averages out to about 15-16 US dollars per Catholic! About enough for lunch at a good restaurant!

3. OK, sheep, let's get serious here. Let's talk SERIOUSLY about "keeping Christ's teachings". Let me grab my Bible, go to the Sermon on the Mount and just pick out a verse or two at random. Don't go away, I'll be right back!

Hmm...OK, how about this: Mt 5:27ff.: "You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.' But now I tell you, anyone who looks with lust at a woman is guilty of committing adultery with her in his heart. So if your right eye causes you to sin, take it out and throw it away! It is much better for you to lose a part of your body than to have your whole body thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away! It is much better for you to lose one of your limbs than to have your whole body go off to hell."

Now, sheep, unless you are a Seventh Day Adventist, I am assuming that you will be attending services tomorrow. Here is what I would like you to do:

When the service is over, run outside ahead of everyone else, find a good vantage point, and make a tally of the number of your fellow worshipers, especially the men, who are missing an eye, an arm, or both. According to your beliefs as stated previously in this thread, that should be about everyone.

And other contributors to this thread, please feel free to report your own observations in this regard.

I will do the same.

Then, when all have reported, let's continue the discussion.

If the final tally is ZERO, as I suspect, then I think that it is reasonable for most of us, as Christians, to assume that the Lord was using a bit of hyperbole here. And that applies to some of the rest of the SOTM as well. That does make it any less special as possibly the greatest sermon ever preached!
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

Mark Aspam;1451411 wrote: 1. I have never turned on the teevee for that purpose. I DID watch Bishop Fulton J.Sheen's weekly show on the DuMont network in the 1950's, we graduated from the same high school, he in 1917 (as I recall), I 41 years later. He discussed MANY aspects of Christianity, it is a multi-faceted religion, a concept that seems to have eluded you.

2. Hilarious! The last I heard, the estimated resources of the RCC were in the range of 15-16 billion dollars. That averages out to about 15-16 US dollars per Catholic! About enough for lunch at a good restaurant!

3. OK, sheep, let's get serious here. Let's talk SERIOUSLY about "keeping Christ's teachings". Let me grab my Bible, go to the Sermon on the Mount and just pick out a verse or two at random. Don't go away, I'll be right back!

Hmm...OK, how about this: Mt 5:27ff.: "You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.' But now I tell you, anyone who looks with lust at a woman is guilty of committing adultery with her in his heart. So if your right eye causes you to sin, take it out and throw it away! It is much better for you to lose a part of your body than to have your whole body thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away! It is much better for you to lose one of your limbs than to have your whole body go off to hell."

Now, sheep, unless you are a Seventh Day Adventist, I am assuming that you will be attending services tomorrow. Here is what I would like you to do:

When the service is over, run outside ahead of everyone else, find a good vantage point, and make a tally of the number of your fellow worshipers, especially the men, who are missing an eye, an arm, or both. According to your beliefs as stated previously in this thread, that should be about everyone.

And other contributors to this thread, please feel free to report your own observations in this regard.

I will do the same.

Then, when all have reported, let's continue the discussion.

If the final tally is ZERO, as I suspect, then I think that it is reasonable for most of us, as Christians, to assume that the Lord was using a bit of hyperbole here. And that applies to some of the rest of the SOTM as well. That does make it any less special as possibly the greatest sermon ever preached!


Mark I highly doubt an organization which has an annual budget of 170 billion in 2010 is only worth 15-16 billion dollars.

The following is just a small amount quoted from an article posted in economist. com/node/21560536



The Economist estimates that annual spending by the church and entities owned by the church was around $170 billion in 2010 (the church does not release such figures). We think 57% of this goes on health-care networks, followed by 28% on colleges, with parish and diocesan day-to-day operations accounting for just 6% and national charitable activities just 2.7% (see chart). In total, Catholic institutions employ over 1m people, reckons Fred Gluck, a former McKinsey managing partner and co-founder of the National Leadership Roundtable on Church Management, a lay organisation seeking to improve the way the church is run. For purposes of secular comparison, in 2010 General Electric’s revenue was $150 billion and Walmart employed roughly 2m people.

The church is the largest single charitable organisation in the country. Catholic Charities USA, its main charity, and its subsidiaries employ over 65,000 paid staff and serve over 10m people. These organisations distributed $4.7 billion to the poor in 2010, of which 62% came from local, state and federal government agencies.

The American church may account for as much as 60% of the global institution’s wealth. Little surprise, then, that it is the biggest contributor to head office (ahead of Germany, Italy and France). Everything from renovations to St Peter’s Basilica in Rome to the Pontifical Gregorian University, the church’s version of West Point, is largely paid for with American money.

Where that money comes from is hard to say (the church does not release numbers on this either). Some of it is from the offerings of the faithful. Anecdotal evidence suggests that America’s Catholics give about $10 per week on average. Assuming that one-third attend church regularly, that would put the annual offertory income at around $13 billion. More comes from elite groups of large donors such as the Papal Foundation, based in Pennsylvania, whose 138 members pledge to donate at least $1m annually, and Legatus, a group of more than 2,000 Catholic business leaders that was founded by Tom Monaghan of Domino’s Pizza.





As “debtors in possession”—entities that have filed for bankruptcy yet retain their assets—bust dioceses have an obligation to enlarge their assets to satisfy their creditors. On the contrary, “we have seen a consistent tactic of Catholic bishops to shrink the size of their assets, which is not only wrong morally but in violation of state and federal law,” says Ken Brown of Pachulski Stang, a California law firm that has represented creditors in eight of the ten Catholic bankruptcy cases.

In a particularly striking example, the diocese of San Diego listed the value of a whole city block in downtown San Diego at $40,000, the price at which it had been acquired in the 1940s, rather than trying to estimate the current market value, as required. Worse, it altered the forms in which assets had to be listed. The judge in the case, Louise Adler, was so vexed by this and other shenanigans on the part of the diocese that she ordered a special investigation into church finances which was led by Todd Neilson, a former FBI agent and renowned forensic accountant. The diocese ended up settling its sexual-abuse cases for almost $200m. If it had not done so, the bankruptcy would have been thrown out of court and the bishop and chancellor of the diocese and its lawyers might have faced contempt charges.

The idea that the catholic church has assets of only 15 to 16 billion, as you suggest, is only as believable as the value of the San Diego's downtown property (mentioned in the article above) only being worth 40,000 Dollars.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
Mark Aspam
Posts: 668
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:00 am

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by Mark Aspam »

sheep;1451430 wrote: Mark I highly doubt an organization which has an annual budget of 170 billion in 2010 is only worth 15-16 billion dollars.The figures you quoted are interesting, but that is money that goes in and out.

Nearly all of the weekly contributions of parishioners remain in the parish or diocese. Only one collection PER YEAR goes to the Vatican, to be used as the pope and his advisors see fit, and it is the second collection on that particular Sunday.

Money ON HAND, with no particular immediate usage, is the source of the 15-16 billion figure, and I think that's probably a reasonable estimate, as I said, about enough money per Catholic to buy a square meal.

Sheep, a suggestion: once you have reported your observations regarding the missing eyes and limbs of your fellow worshippers, how about identifying your own sect - if you already did so I missed it - and tell us how it goes about its own financial matters. Do you have your own colleges, universities, hospitals, etc. Or perhaps you regard such things as unholy. Just curious.
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

Mark Aspam;1451431 wrote: The figures you quoted are interesting, but that is money that goes in and out.

Nearly all of the weekly contributions of parishioners remain in the parish or diocese. Only one collection PER YEAR goes to the Vatican, to be used as the pope and his advisors see fit, and it is the second collection on that particular Sunday.

Money ON HAND, with no particular immediate usage, is the source of the 15-16 billion figure, and I think that's probably a reasonable estimate, as I said, about enough money per Catholic to buy a square meal.

Sheep, a suggestion: once you have reported your observations regarding the missing eyes and limbs of your fellow worshippers, how about identifying your own sect - if you already did so I missed it - and tell us how it goes about its own financial matters. Do you have your own colleges, universities, hospitals, etc. Or perhaps you regard such things as unholy. Just curious.


Actually those figures were only the U.S. catholic churches estimated national operating budget, as found at:

economist. com/blogs/newsbook/2012/08/catholic-church-america

As for my church/sect financial matters, As I believe all men are not only created equal, but that are men are equal, I see organized religion, as a higher-Archy system, to be wrong. Men ruling over men is the equivalent of men debasing men. I see each and every human as my equal and do not therefore see it to be right to have others rule me, nor is it right for me to rule others. All men have the right to be respected and treated equally: with care and dignity.

I see organized religion to be nothing more then men ruling men and Jesus did not subscribed to such a system: even though he was/is Lord of all.

Government and organized religion are the 2 great evils in our world and until we banish both from the earth men will continue to live under oppression.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
Mark Aspam
Posts: 668
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:00 am

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by Mark Aspam »

sheep;1451439 wrote: Actually those figures were only the U.S. catholic churches estimated national operating budget, as found at:

economist. com/blogs/newsbook/2012/08/catholic-church-americaUnderstood. "Operating budget" is not "wealth". Wealth is what is left over, "money in the bank", "nest egg", "knippl".

Regarding your personal confession of faith, that is fine for you, and very well stated.

Most of the rest of us regard Christianity as a COMMUNITY of believers, just as described in Acts and in Paul's letters.
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

Mark Aspam;1451440 wrote: Understood. "Operating budget" is not "wealth". Wealth is what is left over, "money in the bank", "nest egg", "knippl".

Regarding your personal confession of faith, that is fine for you, and very well stated.

Most of the rest of us regard Christianity as a COMMUNITY of believers, just as described in Acts and in Paul's letters.


I understand that operating budget is not wealth, but I find it hard to believe that all of the churches assets in the thousands upon thousands of cities throughout the world are truly only worth 15-16 billion dollars... I suspect that is only true if you use the same accounting measure the church did to evaluate the San Diego property that was clearly worth 10's of millions, at the 1940 price of 40,000 dollars.

It is the definition of what defines that community which is in question.

I don't see Paul's writings as defining equality within that community: below is an example of what I mean.

Col 3:18 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord...

Col 3:20 Children, obey your parents in all things: for this is well pleasing unto the Lord.

Col 3:22 Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God:

Should wives submit themselves to their husbands? I thank God that my wife refused to live under such oppression. It is through her rebellion to such an ordnance that I learned to treat her with respect as my equal: in accordance to the teachings of Christ.

Mat 6:24 No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other.

Should servants obey their masters according to the flesh? Can a person serve 2 masters? Should men accept the corrupt practice of oppression that Paul did?

I am continually amazed at how Paul's teachings are accepted: though they contradict the teachings of Christ.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12366
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by LarsMac »

sheep;1451452 wrote: I understand that operating budget is not wealth, but I find it hard to believe that all of the churches assets in the thousands upon thousands of cities throughout the world are truly only worth 15-16 billion dollars... I suspect that is only true if you use the same accounting measure the church did to evaluate the San Diego property that was clearly worth 10's of millions, at the 1940 price of 40,000 dollars.

It is the definition of what defines that community which is in question.

I don't see Paul's writings as defining equality within that community: below is an example of what I mean.

Col 3:18 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord...

Col 3:20 Children, obey your parents in all things: for this is well pleasing unto the Lord.

Col 3:22 Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God:

Should wives submit themselves to their husbands? I thank God that my wife refused to live under such oppression. It is through her rebellion to such an ordnance that I learned to treat her with respect as my equal: in accordance to the teachings of Christ.

Mat 6:24 No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other.

Should servants obey their masters according to the flesh? Can a person serve 2 masters? Should men accept the corrupt practice of oppression that Paul did?

I am continually amazed at how Paul's teachings are accepted: though they contradict the teachings of Christ.


Paul's writings have to be considered within the historical period they were written, and to some extent the context of the conversations he was having, not to mention with whom he was conversing.
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
Mark Aspam
Posts: 668
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:00 am

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by Mark Aspam »

sheep;1451452 wrote: I understand that operating budget is not wealth, but I find it hard to believe that all of the churches assets in the thousands upon thousands of cities throughout the world are truly only worth 15-16 billion dollars... You are correct, the real estate is owned by the diocese, not the Vatican, so that would not be included in the 15-16 billion.

There are RC storefront churches, I attended one, Kerk Pax Christi, when I lived in Rotterdam, Holland. But those are exceptional. (Added later: There was another in downtown Dallas, Texas, the last time I was there)

Now, regarding Paul, that could be a whole 'nother thread. Were it not for Paul, it's possible that Christianity would never have existed outside of a small clique within Judaism, and even then only for a couple of generations, as Christ's promised quick return (within the lifetime of at least some of His followers) did not occur.

But, as I said, that is probably beyond the scope of this thread.
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

LarsMac;1451461 wrote: Paul's writings have to be considered within the historical period they were written, and to some extent the context of the conversations he was having, not to mention with whom he was conversing.


I have heard that argument before. But how is it that Jesus' teachings don't need to be justified in this way, but Paul's followers continually make excuses for Paul's teachings in this way. And when is it that we stop having to make these excuses for Paul's teachings: isn't it once men have stopped embracing the teachings of Paul that these excuses thus then stop? Doesn't that prove how unenlightened Paul actually is.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

Mark Aspam;1451499 wrote: You are correct, the real estate is owned by the diocese, not the Vatican, so that would not be included in the 15-16 billion.

There are RC storefront churches, I attended one, Kerk Pax Christi, when I lived in Rotterdam, Holland. But those are exceptional. (Added later: There was another in downtown Dallas, Texas, the last time I was there)

Now, regarding Paul, that could be a whole 'nother thread. Were it not for Paul, it's possible that Christianity would never have existed outside of a small clique within Judaism, and even then only for a couple of generations, as Christ's promised quick return (within the lifetime of at least some of His followers) did not occur.

But, as I said, that is probably beyond the scope of this thread.


One can only speculate what would have become of the church without Paul... I actually think it would have thrived under the embracing of Christ and his teachings alone. The gospel was going out to the gentiles before Paul and while it might have taken longer, it would been healthier in the long run: in my opinion.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12366
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by LarsMac »

sheep;1451525 wrote: I have heard that argument before. But how is it that Jesus' teachings don't need to be justified in this way, but Paul's followers continually make excuses for Paul's teachings in this way. And when is it that we stop having to make these excuses for Paul's teachings: isn't it once men have stopped embracing the teachings of Paul that these excuses thus then stop? Doesn't that prove how unenlightened Paul actually is.


I did not realize I was "making excuses for Paul"

The point is more that people today bring up Paul's writings and use them to try and further their own agenda in the world today.

Many of Paul's letters were to address specific questions from the congregations to whom he was writing. But, Christians all over the world will take those answers to specific issues, and attempt to apply them to the more general audience.

How is this Paul's fault?
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

LarsMac;1451531 wrote: I did not realize I was "making excuses for Paul"

The point is more that people today bring up Paul's writings and use them to try and further their own agenda in the world today.

Many of Paul's letters were to address specific questions from the congregations to whom he was writing. But, Christians all over the world will take those answers to specific issues, and attempt to apply them to the more general audience.

How is this Paul's fault?


I don't know how you came to that assumption and even if he was answering questions his answers are wrong and definitely not inspired by God... Loving your neighbor equal to yourself demands you not oppressing them and Paul's teachings clearly justified the use of force to judge others, while Jesus' teachings condemned judging others... on the contrary he taught forgiveness, while Paul justified the use of force and said that those who use it are ministers of God.

Are people so blind that they cannot see a clear contradiction even when it is slapping them in the face? Paul is a hieratic.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12366
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by LarsMac »

sheep;1451646 wrote: I don't know how you came to that assumption and even if he was answering questions his answers are wrong and definitely not inspired by God... Loving your neighbor equal to yourself demands you not oppressing them and Paul's teachings clearly justified the use of force to judge others, while Jesus' teachings condemned judging others... on the contrary he taught forgiveness, while Paul justified the use of force and said that those who use it are ministers of God.

Are people so blind that they cannot see a clear contradiction even when it is slapping them in the face? Paul is a hieratic.


I see nothing in Paul's letters that ever justifies violence and use of force, or judging others.

I can see where the unenlightened my take his words and turn them to be used to justify their own behavior, but clearly, Paul never justified such behavior.
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

LarsMac;1451648 wrote: I see nothing in Paul's letters that ever justifies violence and use of force, or judging others.

I can see where the unenlightened my take his words and turn them to be used to justify their own behavior, but clearly, Paul never justified such behavior.


Rom 13:3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil (what ever happened to don't judge? I guess that doesn't hold true for anyone Paul gives an exemption to). Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same(since Paul was killed by the powers that be, it must be proof he was either evil or his words were wrong):

Rom 13:4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good(tell that to Jesus and the apostles and the Jews killed by hitler). But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain(Paul gives an exemption to men that Jesus does not and thus Paul voids the words of Jesus: by saying those who bear the sword, or a gun, have the right to harm others.): for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil (again Paul makes void the words of Jesus by giving an exemption to men to Judge and not cast off others debts(forgive)).

Rom 13:5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.

Larsmac, Paul not only did sanction evil, he spoke against the authority of Christ's teachings: by doing so.

Men take power by force and if you are my equal it is wrong for me to control you and it is wrong for you to control me... those who rule others are evil: not ministers of God but ministers of Satan's.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12366
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by LarsMac »

sheep;1451671 wrote: Rom 13:3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil (what ever happened to don't judge? I guess that doesn't hold true for anyone Paul gives an exemption to). Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same(since Paul was killed by the powers that be, it must be proof he was either evil or his words were wrong):

Rom 13:4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good(tell that to Jesus and the apostles and the Jews killed by hitler). But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain(Paul gives an exemption to men that Jesus does not and thus Paul voids the words of Jesus: by saying those who bear the sword, or a gun, have the right to harm others.): for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil (again Paul makes void the words of Jesus by giving an exemption to men to Judge and not cast off others debts(forgive)).

Rom 13:5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.

Larsmac, Paul not only did sanction evil, he spoke against the authority of Christ's teachings: by doing so.

Men take power by force and if you are my equal it is wrong for me to control you and it is wrong for you to control me... those who rule others are evil: not ministers of God but ministers of Satan's.


And there you have just made my point. All the literalists, yourself included, forget who it was that Paul addressed in these letters.



Paul's message was no different than most who advise those seeking enlightenment.

He is not justifying evil. He is advising those who would follow Jesus to mind themselves and do no evil, in spite of what may befall them from the authorities. If you commit evil under the guise of resisting evil, you are a hypocrite, and have condemned yourself, and the evil will continue in spite of your efforts.

The end does NOT justify the means.
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

LarsMac;1451681 wrote: And there you have just made my point. All the literalists, yourself included, forget who it was that Paul addressed in these letters.



Paul's message was no different than most who advise those seeking enlightenment.

He is not justifying evil. He is advising those who would follow Jesus to mind themselves and do no evil, in spite of what may befall them from the authorities. If you commit evil under the guise of resisting evil, you are a hypocrite, and have condemned yourself, and the evil will continue in spite of your efforts.

The end does NOT justify the means.


I know very well who Paul is addressing, but you are missing the point... Paul claimed those who are in power (who walk against the teachings of Jesus) are ministers of God. He justifies the use of force: against the teachings of Jesus.

Governments, as those who do harm to others, are evil and yes Paul does justify them and the evil they do.

Larsmac, I have made the point so clearly that I think you are the only one who is not seeing what is clearly being stated.

For your benefit I'll restate what I have previously stated: "Men take power by force and if you are my equal it is wrong for me to control you and it is wrong for you to control me... those who rule others are evil: not ministers of God (as Paul stated) but ministers of Satan's."
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12366
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by LarsMac »

sheep;1451690 wrote: I know very well who Paul is addressing, but you are missing the point... Paul claimed those who are in power (who walk against the teachings of Jesus) are ministers of God. He justifies the use of force: against the teachings of Jesus.

Governments, as those who do harm to others, are evil and yes Paul does justify them and the evil they do.

Larsmac, I have made the point so clearly that I think you are the only one who is not seeing what is clearly being stated.

For your benefit I'll restate what I have previously stated: "Men take power by force and if you are my equal it is wrong for me to control you and it is wrong for you to control me... those who rule others are evil: not ministers of God (as Paul stated) but ministers of Satan's."


Thank you so much.

But it is not I that misses the point.

You cannot blame Paul for how men interpret his words.
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

LarsMac;1451692 wrote: Thank you so much.

But it is not I that misses the point.

You cannot blame Paul for how men interpret his words.


Paul is very clear.... he states those who judge others are ministers of God and Jesus taught against such a practice... thus Paul sanctions what Jesus condemns.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

sheep;1451697 wrote: Paul is very clear.... he states those who judge others are ministers of God and Jesus taught against such a practice... thus Paul sanctions what Jesus condemns.


Paul is very clear.... he states those who judge others are ministers of God and Jesus taught against such a practice... thus Paul sanctions what Jesus condemns.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12366
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by LarsMac »

sheep;1451698 wrote: Paul is very clear.... he states those who judge others are ministers of God and Jesus taught against such a practice... thus Paul sanctions what Jesus condemns.


I suggest you spend more time studying Paul's letter to the Romans in its entirety before accusing him.

One can pick and choose specific verses from the scriptures to hold up as proof for nearly any evil they wish to rationalize.

I can't help but wonder what it is you really hope to accomplish with this argument of yours.

"I've spoken my piece, and counted to three."
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
sheep
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:47 pm

Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.

Post by sheep »

LarsMac;1451702 wrote: I suggest you spend more time studying Paul's letter to the Romans in its entirety before accusing him.

One can pick and choose specific verses from the scriptures to hold up as proof for nearly any evil they wish to rationalize.

I can't help but wonder what it is you really hope to accomplish with this argument of yours.

"I've spoken my piece, and counted to three."


How am I rationalizing evil? I am only trying to point out that Paul was a heretic. Paul clearly gave an exemption to men that walk contrary to Jesus' teachings. It is not I who wish to rationalize evil but you: as you wish to rationalize the evil Paul ignorantly condoned.

Jesus taught men to forgive, not to employ evil for evil, but rather good for evil. Paul clearly condoned the evil practices that Rulers employ and as long as you embrace Paul you cannot embrace Christ and this is what I am clearly trying to show. You feel that men should be employed to enforce teachings that are contrary to Christ's teachings and thereby you are propagating beliefs that stop the teachings of Christ from being embraced by all men: as Paul did. Is it I who is wishing to rationalize evil or you?
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.

Return to “Christianity”