Ted wrote: gmc:-6
If you had a clue as to what you were talking about it would help. You neither describe my beliefs or the beliefs of many theologians today. As for all the rest; As you say.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Your point is?
I have made quite clear that I don't subscribe to your beliefs or indeed of any of the established religons.
I have also not made any effort to describe your beliefs or anyone elses but kept comments as general as possible to avoid giving offence. Like too many of a religious disposition your general attitide seems to be of you don't agree you are ignorant, misinformed, just not capable of understanding or don't know what you are talking about but at the same time you expect your beliefs to be treated with respect and given a credence beyond all common sense. If you want to be treated with respect then you should start by respecting the opinions of others. At best agree to disagree with mutual respect.
I don't believe the basic premise that the bible is the word of god, therfeore any debate using carefully selected quotes from the bible is pointless. If you are a christian then surely the only testament that matters is the words of JC as described by those who won out in the early schisms of the christian church.
The bible is like many religious tracts, for the guidance of wise men and the blind belief of fools.
shalom.
An Open Invitation
An Open Invitation
JAB:-6
It is absolutely not condescending. I really couldn't care less whether one believs as I do. It is immaterial to me. However, one can exercise an open mind and make an effor to understand anothers position. The basic problem within the Christian faith is a lack of effort to understand the various interpretations of the faith. It absolutely matters not that they all agree. I have done and continue to make such an effort. I have been there and done that--fundamentalism/literalism. The fundamentalists spent too much of their time looking at the speck in others eyes while forgetting the log in theirs.
Shalom
Ted:-6
It is absolutely not condescending. I really couldn't care less whether one believs as I do. It is immaterial to me. However, one can exercise an open mind and make an effor to understand anothers position. The basic problem within the Christian faith is a lack of effort to understand the various interpretations of the faith. It absolutely matters not that they all agree. I have done and continue to make such an effort. I have been there and done that--fundamentalism/literalism. The fundamentalists spent too much of their time looking at the speck in others eyes while forgetting the log in theirs.
Shalom
Ted:-6
An Open Invitation
telaquapacky wrote:
There is a difference between inheriting sin from Adam and the sins I myself commit. The sin nature I inherited from Adam is the "root." The sins I commit are the "fruit."
Thank you for that - it explains the differentiation nicely.
There is a difference between inheriting sin from Adam and the sins I myself commit. The sin nature I inherited from Adam is the "root." The sins I commit are the "fruit."
Thank you for that - it explains the differentiation nicely.
An Open Invitation
Ted wrote: FarRider:-6
Re your comments on an "object lesson". Not all Christians agree with you on that one. Obviously you have made no effort to understand. That too is a shame.
I think you'd be hard pushed to find many things ALL Christians agreed with.
Far might not agree with you but that does not meen that he's made no effort to understand - he obvoiusly has spent a lot of time trying.
Re your comments on an "object lesson". Not all Christians agree with you on that one. Obviously you have made no effort to understand. That too is a shame.
I think you'd be hard pushed to find many things ALL Christians agreed with.
Far might not agree with you but that does not meen that he's made no effort to understand - he obvoiusly has spent a lot of time trying.
An Open Invitation
gmc:-6
You have made blanket statements that are patently false. You do not reflect the Christian faith as I know it to be. What you believe is your business and none of mine. I do object to false statements being presented as blanket truths.
There are other views of the Bible that are neither views of its value as history nor views that make it nothing more then an ancient work of fiction. Perhaps you don't know anything about those views--the use of midrash, myth, legend, folk tale, poetry, short story, fiction, metaphor etc. to teach truth. One first Nation person said "I don't know if the story actually happened this way but I know that it is the truth". (M. Borg) Witness Dickens' great novel "Oliver Twist". It presents much truth about a society.
Your comments on what came from the Bible or what did not come from the Bible are highly incomplete and one sided. There have been negatives, that I will grant you. However, you have conviently overlooked the positives to which millions of folks have attested.
You talk of "sin" but display no complete understanding of what the word involves as now understood by many theologians.
Christianity is not a system of morality. (Pre-eminent Canadian theologian D. J. Hall)
You are correct in the idea of "divine right of kings etc. That is not an acceptable belief within the Christian faith. It was and is a misuse of the faith. Most theologians would agree with me on that one.
The ancient society was patriarchal. That is a given. That is how it developed. However, Christianity was not but has been twisted that way by folks and some churches for reasons they give. Jesus and Paul both had female disciples and missionaries. Most churches today ordain women clergy.
That a religion leads to warfare is not the fault of the religion any more then nuclear warfare is the fault of Dr. Oppenheimer. It is the fault of extremists which exist in every faith every bit as much as there are extremists in many organizations within society.
That we should all think alike--heaven forbid. We would learn nothing if that were the case, absolutely nothing.
Judging others is a misuse of a faith which is clearly instructed in the Bible not to be done. The Bible clearly tells us not to worry about the speck in someone elses eye while we have a log in our own.
Debating and discussion is not Christian? It is a pleasure and a very important way of learning and comming to understand others. We do not all need to agree but if we are to have world peace we must learn to understand and appreciate how others live and think and believe. Some folks are more comfortable with a non-liturgical service and some the other way. The various denominations try to respond to the individual needs of people knowing full well that no two people are exactly alike. Education understands this. People, each learn differently, are more proficient in different subjects and learn at different rates. One size does not and never has fit all.
Thus, with all due respect, I stand by what I have posted. What you have posted is not and never has been, with one exception, part of my faith experience nor is it an accurate reflection of any of the great faiths around the world for which I have the utmost respect.
That the Bible is the "Word of God" is not for Christians by virtue of its authorship but by virtue of the belief that God does speak to us through the very human words of which the Bible is composed. It contains ancient and enduring wisdom just as do many of the other religious documents of the world's great faiths.
A Christian pluralist.
Shalom
Ted:-6
You have made blanket statements that are patently false. You do not reflect the Christian faith as I know it to be. What you believe is your business and none of mine. I do object to false statements being presented as blanket truths.
There are other views of the Bible that are neither views of its value as history nor views that make it nothing more then an ancient work of fiction. Perhaps you don't know anything about those views--the use of midrash, myth, legend, folk tale, poetry, short story, fiction, metaphor etc. to teach truth. One first Nation person said "I don't know if the story actually happened this way but I know that it is the truth". (M. Borg) Witness Dickens' great novel "Oliver Twist". It presents much truth about a society.
Your comments on what came from the Bible or what did not come from the Bible are highly incomplete and one sided. There have been negatives, that I will grant you. However, you have conviently overlooked the positives to which millions of folks have attested.
You talk of "sin" but display no complete understanding of what the word involves as now understood by many theologians.
Christianity is not a system of morality. (Pre-eminent Canadian theologian D. J. Hall)
You are correct in the idea of "divine right of kings etc. That is not an acceptable belief within the Christian faith. It was and is a misuse of the faith. Most theologians would agree with me on that one.
The ancient society was patriarchal. That is a given. That is how it developed. However, Christianity was not but has been twisted that way by folks and some churches for reasons they give. Jesus and Paul both had female disciples and missionaries. Most churches today ordain women clergy.
That a religion leads to warfare is not the fault of the religion any more then nuclear warfare is the fault of Dr. Oppenheimer. It is the fault of extremists which exist in every faith every bit as much as there are extremists in many organizations within society.
That we should all think alike--heaven forbid. We would learn nothing if that were the case, absolutely nothing.
Judging others is a misuse of a faith which is clearly instructed in the Bible not to be done. The Bible clearly tells us not to worry about the speck in someone elses eye while we have a log in our own.
Debating and discussion is not Christian? It is a pleasure and a very important way of learning and comming to understand others. We do not all need to agree but if we are to have world peace we must learn to understand and appreciate how others live and think and believe. Some folks are more comfortable with a non-liturgical service and some the other way. The various denominations try to respond to the individual needs of people knowing full well that no two people are exactly alike. Education understands this. People, each learn differently, are more proficient in different subjects and learn at different rates. One size does not and never has fit all.
Thus, with all due respect, I stand by what I have posted. What you have posted is not and never has been, with one exception, part of my faith experience nor is it an accurate reflection of any of the great faiths around the world for which I have the utmost respect.
That the Bible is the "Word of God" is not for Christians by virtue of its authorship but by virtue of the belief that God does speak to us through the very human words of which the Bible is composed. It contains ancient and enduring wisdom just as do many of the other religious documents of the world's great faiths.
A Christian pluralist.
Shalom
Ted:-6
An Open Invitation
gmc:-6
My personal mission in life is one of service. That is how I live. I feel that is what I am called to do. I also feel called to show others that we must learn to respect and value the thoughts and beliefs of others without denigrating their personal beliefs. If one chooses to be a Christian, Hindu, atheist etc., that is their personal stand and not mine to judge. As such, I feel that when I see others make blanket statements that I believe are misleading I must say so. It was never intended, nor is it now, to be a personal attack on anyone. If it was taken that way I do apoligize.
As a Christian and an educator I feel compelled to present a broader view of life without being negative as much as possible though it is not always so. I have absolutely no problem with what others believe. However as M Borg says, I can be a Christian without in any way denigrating the thoughts or beliefs of others. That is not what Christians are called to do. Jesus was a servant to the point of washing feet an action of total humility. He was also crucified for his teachings because he upset the domination systems, political, social and religious, of his day. He fought for justice and kindliness and demonstrated the humility that we are called to demonstrate. At times, however, he displayed anger when he felt it necessary.
May peace be with you.
Ted:-6
My personal mission in life is one of service. That is how I live. I feel that is what I am called to do. I also feel called to show others that we must learn to respect and value the thoughts and beliefs of others without denigrating their personal beliefs. If one chooses to be a Christian, Hindu, atheist etc., that is their personal stand and not mine to judge. As such, I feel that when I see others make blanket statements that I believe are misleading I must say so. It was never intended, nor is it now, to be a personal attack on anyone. If it was taken that way I do apoligize.
As a Christian and an educator I feel compelled to present a broader view of life without being negative as much as possible though it is not always so. I have absolutely no problem with what others believe. However as M Borg says, I can be a Christian without in any way denigrating the thoughts or beliefs of others. That is not what Christians are called to do. Jesus was a servant to the point of washing feet an action of total humility. He was also crucified for his teachings because he upset the domination systems, political, social and religious, of his day. He fought for justice and kindliness and demonstrated the humility that we are called to demonstrate. At times, however, he displayed anger when he felt it necessary.
May peace be with you.
Ted:-6
An Open Invitation
JAB:-6
Wrong. The shame is in being closed minded and showing a lack of respect for others. It is the closed mind that causes folks to make false and misleading statemnts about others. As an educator I do find that a real shame both for the individual and those s/he is criticising. When one shuts ones self off from life long education s/he is doing both his/herself a disservice and the others they want to criticise.
In this case I have explained elsewhere the lack of understanding. Nowhere is this a personal attack. I do not have to stoop so low as to have to use "put downs" or denigrate the faith or lack of faith of others. That is their personal business alone and none of my business.
As a Christian pluralist I have come to respect others and their faiths and recognize the validity of their position for them and their culture.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Wrong. The shame is in being closed minded and showing a lack of respect for others. It is the closed mind that causes folks to make false and misleading statemnts about others. As an educator I do find that a real shame both for the individual and those s/he is criticising. When one shuts ones self off from life long education s/he is doing both his/herself a disservice and the others they want to criticise.
In this case I have explained elsewhere the lack of understanding. Nowhere is this a personal attack. I do not have to stoop so low as to have to use "put downs" or denigrate the faith or lack of faith of others. That is their personal business alone and none of my business.
As a Christian pluralist I have come to respect others and their faiths and recognize the validity of their position for them and their culture.
Shalom
Ted:-6
An Open Invitation
gmc wrote: 1. If you are a christian then surely the only testament that matters is the words of JC...
2. ...as described by those who won out in the early schisms of the christian church.gmc, you have made similar statements in previous posts, and I'm not sure I get your drift here.
1. The words of Christ, as recounted in the Gospels, are obviously very important to Christians, particularly the Sermon of the Mount, but Christian belief encompasses much more, including the canonical NT letters, the entire OT, and the early history and traditions of the Church.
2. None of those schisms, as far as I know, involved the words of Christ as reported in the Gospels. If you know something I don't, please share it with us, but please be specific.
2. ...as described by those who won out in the early schisms of the christian church.gmc, you have made similar statements in previous posts, and I'm not sure I get your drift here.
1. The words of Christ, as recounted in the Gospels, are obviously very important to Christians, particularly the Sermon of the Mount, but Christian belief encompasses much more, including the canonical NT letters, the entire OT, and the early history and traditions of the Church.
2. None of those schisms, as far as I know, involved the words of Christ as reported in the Gospels. If you know something I don't, please share it with us, but please be specific.
An Open Invitation
Bronwen wrote: gmc, you have made similar statements in previous posts, and I'm not sure I get your drift here.
1. The words of Christ, as recounted in the Gospels, are obviously very important to Christians, particularly the Sermon of the Mount, but Christian belief encompasses much more, including the canonical NT letters, the entire OT, and the early history and traditions of the Church.
2. None of those schisms, as far as I know, involved the words of Christ as reported in the Gospels. If you know something I don't, please share it with us, but please be specific.
I don't intend to get in to an arguement about what is in the bible and who said what and this is what it means etc. Since I am not a bible scholar I would not be able to hold my own and I do not claim any great knowledge. It is interesting as a historical document. a lot of the stories about the flood etc arceological evidence suggests did actually happen and what you have is the description of events peole couldn't explain except by blaming some superior force. The old testamnent god is capricious and vindivtive because life seemed like that.
As a non christian to me the teachings of JC have an elegant simplicity,a lot of sense in them and a certain appeal. Yes I do think he was a real person but whether he was the son of god or one and the same believe as you wish. Personally I don't. I have never been able to understand the fascination with the capricious vindictive god of the old testament-how does forgive those who trespass against us match up to an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. Christian forgiveness or vindictive revenge.
Most of the bigots in religon find their justification in the old testament. If god made all mankind then he made all groups in society so if someone claims a god given right to condemn someone because of race, gender or sexual proclivities and finds justification in the old testament for the enslavement or condemnation of those different from them then I would suggest they are not followers of the late JC. Their faith gives them a particular fanaticism and demented purpose lacking in those who just don't like anybody not like them.
The early history of the church is interesting, one of the more entertainng aspects is the discussion surrounding whether you had to be a jew to become a christian. My understanding is paul thought not. The other one was whether you had to be circumcised or not-again my understanding is that paul was against this-as a roman it is likely he viewed the practice as barbaric. I would suspect he dropped the practice as it would have done little to encourage membership.
A quick search turned up this.
http://atschool.eduweb.co.uk/SBS777/vital/circum.html
You will notice that this instruction was given specifically to Gentiles who had turned to Christ. To assume that it included Jewish converts is an error. The instruction that 'Gentile converts to Christianity need not be circumcised,' passed from city to city. The record tells us that when it was read there was much rejoicing. I just bet there was.
The bible is a much edited book. to believe in it literally I consider absurd with thgose who choose to believe in the creation myth the most absurd of all IMO.
No doubt you are aware of most of this.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A307487
For generation christians have been imposing their particular views on each other at the point of a sword. Most of the disputes between catholic and protestant have been fought and picked over with countless innocents suffering as a consequence. There were seemingly endless wars in europe all made more viscious by religon.
I doubt very much if I know any more than you. Perhaps i just view the same events from a different perspective.
1. The words of Christ, as recounted in the Gospels, are obviously very important to Christians, particularly the Sermon of the Mount, but Christian belief encompasses much more, including the canonical NT letters, the entire OT, and the early history and traditions of the Church.
2. None of those schisms, as far as I know, involved the words of Christ as reported in the Gospels. If you know something I don't, please share it with us, but please be specific.
I don't intend to get in to an arguement about what is in the bible and who said what and this is what it means etc. Since I am not a bible scholar I would not be able to hold my own and I do not claim any great knowledge. It is interesting as a historical document. a lot of the stories about the flood etc arceological evidence suggests did actually happen and what you have is the description of events peole couldn't explain except by blaming some superior force. The old testamnent god is capricious and vindivtive because life seemed like that.
As a non christian to me the teachings of JC have an elegant simplicity,a lot of sense in them and a certain appeal. Yes I do think he was a real person but whether he was the son of god or one and the same believe as you wish. Personally I don't. I have never been able to understand the fascination with the capricious vindictive god of the old testament-how does forgive those who trespass against us match up to an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. Christian forgiveness or vindictive revenge.
Most of the bigots in religon find their justification in the old testament. If god made all mankind then he made all groups in society so if someone claims a god given right to condemn someone because of race, gender or sexual proclivities and finds justification in the old testament for the enslavement or condemnation of those different from them then I would suggest they are not followers of the late JC. Their faith gives them a particular fanaticism and demented purpose lacking in those who just don't like anybody not like them.
The early history of the church is interesting, one of the more entertainng aspects is the discussion surrounding whether you had to be a jew to become a christian. My understanding is paul thought not. The other one was whether you had to be circumcised or not-again my understanding is that paul was against this-as a roman it is likely he viewed the practice as barbaric. I would suspect he dropped the practice as it would have done little to encourage membership.
A quick search turned up this.
http://atschool.eduweb.co.uk/SBS777/vital/circum.html
You will notice that this instruction was given specifically to Gentiles who had turned to Christ. To assume that it included Jewish converts is an error. The instruction that 'Gentile converts to Christianity need not be circumcised,' passed from city to city. The record tells us that when it was read there was much rejoicing. I just bet there was.
The bible is a much edited book. to believe in it literally I consider absurd with thgose who choose to believe in the creation myth the most absurd of all IMO.
No doubt you are aware of most of this.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A307487
For generation christians have been imposing their particular views on each other at the point of a sword. Most of the disputes between catholic and protestant have been fought and picked over with countless innocents suffering as a consequence. There were seemingly endless wars in europe all made more viscious by religon.
I doubt very much if I know any more than you. Perhaps i just view the same events from a different perspective.
-
telaquapacky
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:00 pm
An Open Invitation
Hi, gmc!
The reason it's pointless for Christians to argue over the Scriptures is that all denominations have their own way of abusing them.
To everybody-
If it's not too late (I was sick, and somewhat involved in Bronwen's other thread "Adventism and Catholicism) I'd like to say something more about baptism.
Seventh-day Adventists regard baptism as a public statement of belief. In a symbolic sense, it represents a burial- the watery grave for the old man of sin, my former nature. But in a metaphysical sense, I don't think most of us see it as much more than when we take a bath or shower, we get wet, we dry off, (there's an audience, and a minister present, that's all). It's the testimony of faith it makes that counts. You do that every time you witness.
But to us, the spiritual baptism that really counts is the baptism of the Holy Spirit. We are also looking for a special outpouring of the Holy Spirit just before the second coming of Christ, called the "latter rain," from James 5:7. We believe it is falling now.
The reason it's pointless for Christians to argue over the Scriptures is that all denominations have their own way of abusing them.
To everybody-
If it's not too late (I was sick, and somewhat involved in Bronwen's other thread "Adventism and Catholicism) I'd like to say something more about baptism.
Seventh-day Adventists regard baptism as a public statement of belief. In a symbolic sense, it represents a burial- the watery grave for the old man of sin, my former nature. But in a metaphysical sense, I don't think most of us see it as much more than when we take a bath or shower, we get wet, we dry off, (there's an audience, and a minister present, that's all). It's the testimony of faith it makes that counts. You do that every time you witness.
But to us, the spiritual baptism that really counts is the baptism of the Holy Spirit. We are also looking for a special outpouring of the Holy Spirit just before the second coming of Christ, called the "latter rain," from James 5:7. We believe it is falling now.
Look what the cat dragged in.
An Open Invitation
JAB:-6
I have never criticised anyone for there abilities or lack thereof. That is nonsense. Nor do I stoop to name calling or referring to others in derogatory terms.
As I said the shame is in not having a mind open enough to learn to respect others and what they believe. That is the shame.
What part of that don't you understand? Give me a break. BTW that is a question and not a statement.
As for my being "forceful". Not any more so then anyone else. At least I can back up what I say. If others don't like it I really don't care. That is not the point. It is time that others realized there is more then one interpretation.
If you don't like the word "shame" then don't read it.
Now, I've made my point. I will leave you to have the last word.
Shalom
Ted:-6
I have never criticised anyone for there abilities or lack thereof. That is nonsense. Nor do I stoop to name calling or referring to others in derogatory terms.
As I said the shame is in not having a mind open enough to learn to respect others and what they believe. That is the shame.
What part of that don't you understand? Give me a break. BTW that is a question and not a statement.
As for my being "forceful". Not any more so then anyone else. At least I can back up what I say. If others don't like it I really don't care. That is not the point. It is time that others realized there is more then one interpretation.
If you don't like the word "shame" then don't read it.
Now, I've made my point. I will leave you to have the last word.
Shalom
Ted:-6
An Open Invitation
JAB:-6
I will answer your question.
Do you actually think I care what others here think about me or how they treat me? I have been called names on forums and belittled and can honestly say it was the Christians who did that. I am a professional and have far more integrity then that. For me it is what I know that counts. What others know for themselves is not my business but there's. Feel quite free to disagree. That is how each of us learns.
Shalom
Ted:-6
I will answer your question.
Do you actually think I care what others here think about me or how they treat me? I have been called names on forums and belittled and can honestly say it was the Christians who did that. I am a professional and have far more integrity then that. For me it is what I know that counts. What others know for themselves is not my business but there's. Feel quite free to disagree. That is how each of us learns.
Shalom
Ted:-6
An Open Invitation
JAB:-6 :-6
I don't subscribe to the policy of "do unto others only do it first". LOL
Shalom
Ted:-6
I don't subscribe to the policy of "do unto others only do it first". LOL
Shalom
Ted:-6
An Open Invitation
JAB:-6
I must say that when one is shown some respect it is nice and I am greatfully thankful for it. However, I don't need it. After some 30 years in public life as an educator I have been praised, vilified, threatened etc. I had to go with what I knew, as an educator, to be the best regardles of what others said. I can give you one lovely experience. One morning at about 9:00 I received a phone call from a parent telling me I was too lenient. At about 9:30 the same day I had a parent call me and tell me I was far to strict. It was worth a laugh, I must admit.
I'm sure you can get the picture from that. Thus goes work in public life. That is one example of hundreds.
There are two things that I do get a little testy about. One is being called a liar since my word has been the most important thing that I own. The second thing is to accuse me of doing something, such as commenting to a person on their abilities or lack thereof. In thirty years I have never treated a student or collegue or parent with anything but respect no matter how exasperating it can be at times. I could also get annoyed at teachers or other adults or other young folks who treated young folks in any disrespectful manner. Young folks are humans who deserve every bit as much respect as do the adults and I believe have every right to be treated so.
My policy is to treat others as I want to be treated. If they return the respect then I have gained a favourable opinion. If they return guile or disrespect that also tells me something about them.
Shalom
Ted:-6
I must say that when one is shown some respect it is nice and I am greatfully thankful for it. However, I don't need it. After some 30 years in public life as an educator I have been praised, vilified, threatened etc. I had to go with what I knew, as an educator, to be the best regardles of what others said. I can give you one lovely experience. One morning at about 9:00 I received a phone call from a parent telling me I was too lenient. At about 9:30 the same day I had a parent call me and tell me I was far to strict. It was worth a laugh, I must admit.
I'm sure you can get the picture from that. Thus goes work in public life. That is one example of hundreds.
There are two things that I do get a little testy about. One is being called a liar since my word has been the most important thing that I own. The second thing is to accuse me of doing something, such as commenting to a person on their abilities or lack thereof. In thirty years I have never treated a student or collegue or parent with anything but respect no matter how exasperating it can be at times. I could also get annoyed at teachers or other adults or other young folks who treated young folks in any disrespectful manner. Young folks are humans who deserve every bit as much respect as do the adults and I believe have every right to be treated so.
My policy is to treat others as I want to be treated. If they return the respect then I have gained a favourable opinion. If they return guile or disrespect that also tells me something about them.
Shalom
Ted:-6
An Open Invitation
JAB:-6
All is fine. You will believe as you feel necessary and I will believe as I feel necessary.
Shalom
Ted:-6
All is fine. You will believe as you feel necessary and I will believe as I feel necessary.
Shalom
Ted:-6
An Open Invitation
posted by telepaquacky
The reason it's pointless for Christians to argue over the Scriptures is that all denominations have their own way of abusing them.
Welcome back.
So why can't you just agree that you agree on all that matters and the rest is flim flam.
It's a bit like buying a house together-you all feel you need one, generally speaking you all agree on the basic design but you fight over the interior decoration and forget you all want to live in the same house but destroy it fighting over the wallpaper and wonder why most people think you of your heads. Now you have muslims moved in next door and between you seem determined to destroy the neighbourhood.
The only thing that unites you is when you combine against those who think religon a load of rubbish and you gang up to demend respect for your beliefs and to stop anyone questioning the basic premise.
The reason it's pointless for Christians to argue over the Scriptures is that all denominations have their own way of abusing them.
Welcome back.
So why can't you just agree that you agree on all that matters and the rest is flim flam.
It's a bit like buying a house together-you all feel you need one, generally speaking you all agree on the basic design but you fight over the interior decoration and forget you all want to live in the same house but destroy it fighting over the wallpaper and wonder why most people think you of your heads. Now you have muslims moved in next door and between you seem determined to destroy the neighbourhood.
The only thing that unites you is when you combine against those who think religon a load of rubbish and you gang up to demend respect for your beliefs and to stop anyone questioning the basic premise.
An Open Invitation
gmc:-6
Your points about the disagreement of the house make me think of a story, supposedly true, where the husband took his chain saw and actually cut the house in half. LOL.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Your points about the disagreement of the house make me think of a story, supposedly true, where the husband took his chain saw and actually cut the house in half. LOL.
Shalom
Ted:-6
An Open Invitation
tel:-6
It is rather interesting that you would say "all denominations have their own way of abusing them."
The fact that you would claim that the SDA's have it all correct and accurate is ludicrous. Anyone who claims to have all the answers or the direct line or the red phone to God is living in a delusion.
But, if that is what you think, go for it.
Shalom
Ted:-6
It is rather interesting that you would say "all denominations have their own way of abusing them."
The fact that you would claim that the SDA's have it all correct and accurate is ludicrous. Anyone who claims to have all the answers or the direct line or the red phone to God is living in a delusion.
But, if that is what you think, go for it.
Shalom
Ted:-6
-
telaquapacky
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:00 pm
An Open Invitation
gmc wrote: So why can't you just agree that you agree on all that matters and the rest is flim flam.What we disagree on is whether you have the right to be an unbeliever and pursue life, liberty and happiness as an unbeliever. My church says you have that right- and we are doing more than any other church in the world to protect your right. Their church says "unbelief" is a crime, and it's only the present, precarious and teetering political realities that keep them from rebuilding their system that punished that crime back when they were at the peak of their kingly power.gmc wrote: It's a bit like buying a house together-you all feel you need oneGod has bought His own house. I'm not interested in houses built or bought by men. gmc wrote: The only thing that unites you is when you combine against those who think religon a load of rubbish and you gang up to demend respect for your beliefs and to stop anyone questioning the basic premise.Most religion is a load of rubbish. Question all you want, but you'll make a better impression if you can do it with some intelligence instead of hurling blind accusations. When have I joined anyone else here to gang up against you? You have to be the first atheist I have met with a persecution complex. When it really happens, I hope you and I are cellmates. On second thought, no. My hymn-singing will drive you up a wall.
Look what the cat dragged in.
An Open Invitation
tel:-6
That you would say "Most religions are rubbish" is both arrogant and patently false. However, if it makes you feel better to denigrate other faiths including other Christian denominations in order to elevate your own position then go for it.
Many Christians, I guess those who abuse the scriptures, now realize they don't have to make themselves seem higher up by putting others down.
Shalom
Ted:-6
That you would say "Most religions are rubbish" is both arrogant and patently false. However, if it makes you feel better to denigrate other faiths including other Christian denominations in order to elevate your own position then go for it.
Many Christians, I guess those who abuse the scriptures, now realize they don't have to make themselves seem higher up by putting others down.
Shalom
Ted:-6
-
telaquapacky
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:00 pm
An Open Invitation
Ted wrote: The fact that you would claim that the SDA's have it all correct and accurate is ludicrous. Anyone who claims to have all the answers or the direct line or the red phone to God is living in a delusion.It's not red.
Seriously, Ted, in case you haven't noticed, I'm using much more pluralistic language now. Thing is, you also think that what you have is all correct and accurate. You aren't wishy-washy when you write about your convictions. Why should I be? And really, I don't think anyone here claims to have all the answers.
Everyone here has had some influence on me, even you.
Seriously, Ted, in case you haven't noticed, I'm using much more pluralistic language now. Thing is, you also think that what you have is all correct and accurate. You aren't wishy-washy when you write about your convictions. Why should I be? And really, I don't think anyone here claims to have all the answers.
Everyone here has had some influence on me, even you.
Look what the cat dragged in.
An Open Invitation
tel:-6
I do not make derogatory remarks about other's faith. I find it offensive that others find it necessary to put down others to make themselves look better . In which case I point it out to them. Nor have I ever made a statement such as to imply that other denominations are abusing the scriptures let alone comment on the scriptures of other faiths. That is not what we as Christians are called to do.
Do I know it all or have a direct line to God? Not a chance. I know how little I really know and have a good idea of how much there is yet to learn. Could I be wrong? Sure I could just as much so as anyone else. The search for truth is an ongoing and mind challenging task.
Yes I speak with conviction simply because others force me into that position with their same stance. If others posted with a little less force of conviction so would I.
Now I must congratulate you on the thread on Catholicism and Adventism. It is indeed a worthwhile and informative work. I have learned much from both of you. In fact since I have had some involvement with Roman Catholicism I have probably learned more from you.
Shalom
Ted:-6
I do not make derogatory remarks about other's faith. I find it offensive that others find it necessary to put down others to make themselves look better . In which case I point it out to them. Nor have I ever made a statement such as to imply that other denominations are abusing the scriptures let alone comment on the scriptures of other faiths. That is not what we as Christians are called to do.
Do I know it all or have a direct line to God? Not a chance. I know how little I really know and have a good idea of how much there is yet to learn. Could I be wrong? Sure I could just as much so as anyone else. The search for truth is an ongoing and mind challenging task.
Yes I speak with conviction simply because others force me into that position with their same stance. If others posted with a little less force of conviction so would I.
Now I must congratulate you on the thread on Catholicism and Adventism. It is indeed a worthwhile and informative work. I have learned much from both of you. In fact since I have had some involvement with Roman Catholicism I have probably learned more from you.
Shalom
Ted:-6
-
telaquapacky
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:00 pm
An Open Invitation
Ted wrote: tel:-6
I do not make derogatory remarks about other's faith.Well, I have. And I am sorry. One of the reasons I come here is I spend practically all my social time with other Adventists. I don't intend to change my basic beliefs, but I look for a broader perspective. It's important to me to overcome being insular and bigoted. I hope you will be patient with me. I am truly making an effort. I feel God is convicting me on this.
I do not make derogatory remarks about other's faith.Well, I have. And I am sorry. One of the reasons I come here is I spend practically all my social time with other Adventists. I don't intend to change my basic beliefs, but I look for a broader perspective. It's important to me to overcome being insular and bigoted. I hope you will be patient with me. I am truly making an effort. I feel God is convicting me on this.
Look what the cat dragged in.
An Open Invitation
tel:-6
I may and often do criticise the policies and practises of some churches, including my own, as well as comment on scriptural interpretations. I may even comment on the actions of specific but unnamed clergy but I do not need to nor do I intend to denigrate the church as a whole.
I think that all churches fill a need in particular people. Some like the authoritaian approach of the Roman Catholic Church. Others like the more openness of the Anglican or Lutheran churches. Many folks like the more fundamentalist churches. If that is how individuals feel then may God bless them and may the peace of Christ go with them.
The same holds true for other faiths. They are valid for their culture and the context in which the came to exist and continue to exist. As within Christianity they have many different flavours that span the spectrum of extreme left to extreme right. I think that extremism is dangerous and have shown why but it exists in all faiths.
Jesus demonstrated inclusivism in his ministry. All we have to do is read the parable of the wedding feast. When the invited guests could not come the bride groom sent folks into the streets to bring in whomever they could find. Who came in; Jews, Samaritans, pagans, tax collectors, sinners, prostitutes the weak and the lowly, man and women, no one was refused. He did not ask if they were of one faith or another or no faith. All were welcome. Jesus was even accused of being a drunkard and a glutton. I can imagine he ate and drank a lot with others. That was very important in his day. To eat with someone was considered the ultimate in acceptance.
Jesus did not chastise the rich young man who could not part with his wealth but he felt sorry for him.
If we are to follow in his footsteps and take up our cross etc. then we must do likewise.
May the peace of Christ be with you.
Shalom
Ted:-6
I may and often do criticise the policies and practises of some churches, including my own, as well as comment on scriptural interpretations. I may even comment on the actions of specific but unnamed clergy but I do not need to nor do I intend to denigrate the church as a whole.
I think that all churches fill a need in particular people. Some like the authoritaian approach of the Roman Catholic Church. Others like the more openness of the Anglican or Lutheran churches. Many folks like the more fundamentalist churches. If that is how individuals feel then may God bless them and may the peace of Christ go with them.
The same holds true for other faiths. They are valid for their culture and the context in which the came to exist and continue to exist. As within Christianity they have many different flavours that span the spectrum of extreme left to extreme right. I think that extremism is dangerous and have shown why but it exists in all faiths.
Jesus demonstrated inclusivism in his ministry. All we have to do is read the parable of the wedding feast. When the invited guests could not come the bride groom sent folks into the streets to bring in whomever they could find. Who came in; Jews, Samaritans, pagans, tax collectors, sinners, prostitutes the weak and the lowly, man and women, no one was refused. He did not ask if they were of one faith or another or no faith. All were welcome. Jesus was even accused of being a drunkard and a glutton. I can imagine he ate and drank a lot with others. That was very important in his day. To eat with someone was considered the ultimate in acceptance.
Jesus did not chastise the rich young man who could not part with his wealth but he felt sorry for him.
If we are to follow in his footsteps and take up our cross etc. then we must do likewise.
May the peace of Christ be with you.
Shalom
Ted:-6
An Open Invitation
tel:-6
Thanks. No problem. None of us is perfect including me. Oh that that would change. Maybe in the future kingdom. Who knows?
While I disagree with some of what you say I do have to credit you for your diligence and faith. That too is something we must all learn to acquire.
I know what you mean about isolation. As a teacher sometimes one feels that way as well. You are in a class of some 25-36 but in many ways one feels alone even if one is enjoying one's self. It was nice to do other things at other times. I guess we must all learn to spread ourselves out more and make an effort to enjoy the company of others.
As far a derogatory remarks go, I make a supreme effort to avoid that but sometimes it does creep in and for that I should be taken to task. Though I must disagree strongly with JAB and my use of the word "shame". It was and was intended to be a comment on closed minds.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Thanks. No problem. None of us is perfect including me. Oh that that would change. Maybe in the future kingdom. Who knows?
While I disagree with some of what you say I do have to credit you for your diligence and faith. That too is something we must all learn to acquire.
I know what you mean about isolation. As a teacher sometimes one feels that way as well. You are in a class of some 25-36 but in many ways one feels alone even if one is enjoying one's self. It was nice to do other things at other times. I guess we must all learn to spread ourselves out more and make an effort to enjoy the company of others.
As far a derogatory remarks go, I make a supreme effort to avoid that but sometimes it does creep in and for that I should be taken to task. Though I must disagree strongly with JAB and my use of the word "shame". It was and was intended to be a comment on closed minds.
Shalom
Ted:-6
-
telaquapacky
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:00 pm
An Open Invitation
telaquapacky wrote: Well, I have. And I am sorry. One of the reasons I come here is I spend practically all my social time with other Adventists. I don't intend to change my basic beliefs, but I look for a broader perspective. It's important to me to overcome being insular and bigoted. I hope you will be patient with me. I am truly making an effort. I feel God is convicting me on this.I realize in retrospect that I only half understood what God was telling me. I can no longer allow myself to be drawn as if by a spider into it's web, into any form of conciliation with the antichrist power or it's pug-like defenders (now on my ignore list). They have shown the true nature of the beast for all to see.
As much as I wish charity and goodness to all, and loathe conflict and argument, my honor for God and loyalty to His Truth must come first. My most cherished convictions are not for sale in exchange for others' approval, and fellow Protestants, neither should yours be.
For anyone who wants to read what I consider to be the most important and powerful testimony regarding Romanism and Protestantism, I recommend you check out my posts on page six of the thread, "Adventism and Catholicism." Now there's an eye-opener for you!:D
As much as I wish charity and goodness to all, and loathe conflict and argument, my honor for God and loyalty to His Truth must come first. My most cherished convictions are not for sale in exchange for others' approval, and fellow Protestants, neither should yours be.
For anyone who wants to read what I consider to be the most important and powerful testimony regarding Romanism and Protestantism, I recommend you check out my posts on page six of the thread, "Adventism and Catholicism." Now there's an eye-opener for you!:D
Look what the cat dragged in.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
An Open Invitation
telaquapacky wrote: I realize in retrospect that I only half understood what God was telling me. I can no longer allow myself to be drawn as if by a spider into it's web, into any form of conciliation with the antichrist power or it's pug-like defenders (now on my ignore list). They have shown the true nature of the beast for all to see.Take them off your ignore list and simply ignore them. It's harder, but ultimately more satisfying.
telaquapacky wrote: As much as I wish charity and goodness to all, and loathe conflict and argument, my honor for God and loyalty to His Truth must come first. My most cherished convictions are not for sale in exchange for others' approval, and fellow Protestants, neither should yours be.
:yh_clap
telaquapacky wrote: As much as I wish charity and goodness to all, and loathe conflict and argument, my honor for God and loyalty to His Truth must come first. My most cherished convictions are not for sale in exchange for others' approval, and fellow Protestants, neither should yours be.
:yh_clap
An Open Invitation
telaquapacky wrote: I recommend you check out my posts on page six of the thread, "Adventism and Catholicism." Now there's an eye-opener for you!:DI recommend that anyone who has not already done so check out the entire thread in order to read all of the questions and challenges put to tel there for which he had no answers. That's the real eye-opener.
An Open Invitation
Accountable wrote: Take them off your ignore list and simply ignore them. It's harder, but ultimately more satisfying.I'm a pug-like defender of the power of the Antichrist? There's promotion!
I want a lapel sticker...
I want a lapel sticker...
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
An Open Invitation
tel makes it sound as if we are all wearing the number 666, as if we all wanted to seduce him into something else other then his beliefs. My only hope was that perhaps he would be a little more open minded. His position is exactly what mine was when I was in a very fundamentalist/literalist church. I thank God that my eyes were opened and was lead to many years of study or I might have still been in that cult in which I was raised. My parents also left as well and for the same reason.
I label it as a cult even though it was one of the very right wing evangelical churches because it was not teaching what I saw in the Bible.
Shalom
Ted:-6
I label it as a cult even though it was one of the very right wing evangelical churches because it was not teaching what I saw in the Bible.
Shalom
Ted:-6
An Open Invitation
Ted wrote: tel makes it sound as if we are all wearing the number 666To be honest, if one lives each moment in the conscious knowledge that it may be one's last and that one may immediately be in the presence of the Lord, life is quite a different affair and far less pedestrian. I confess that I don't, but it has attractions, I could aspire to it, and it is a very SDA tenet. From that perspective, those who do and those who don't are beasts of very different aspect.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
An Open Invitation
spot:-6
I can sure go along with "living in the moment."
However when one is living in fear; fear of being tricked or seduced by others or lives in isolation or is told not to listen to others or asscociate with others or not to read certain books etc. one is living in a cult in my opinion.
We have to go no further then the Jesus of the Bible. Whom did he associate with? He associated with the publicans and the sinners, the tax collectors and the oppressed, the prostitues and the widows, the homeless and the street people etc. These are the kinds of folks that Jesus in the parable of the wedding feast invited to the feast. Consider the work of the Salvation Army. They probably more then others fulfill the responsibilities of the Christian way of life. They do not hide in isolation or tie their members down or try to stop them from thinking. If Jesus had isolated himself etc. he would have been and Essene which he was not. That was their style but not his.
I see a problem when folks are afraid to broaden their minds; to learn not only from others but from resources. That coupled with the fear of death and damnation speak of a religion based on fear and not the free grace of God and His unconditional love.
The mainline churches encourage their folks to study and learn, to broaden their minds and to get into life. If God hadn't wanted us to use the intelligence he gave us then we should just become atomitons. As Christians we are to be in the world but not of the world. If we are not in the world then we cannot fulfill the requests of our Lord. I've heard here both implicitly and explicity how the reformers are wrong or treading on thin ice. What I have heard is everyone is out of step but me. It is a sad day when one has to denigrate other faiths as well as other Christian denominations to boost their own. That is not the Christian way. All we have to do is look at the life of Jesus to know better.
Imagine growing old and dying never having lived.
Shalom
Ted:-6
I can sure go along with "living in the moment."
However when one is living in fear; fear of being tricked or seduced by others or lives in isolation or is told not to listen to others or asscociate with others or not to read certain books etc. one is living in a cult in my opinion.
We have to go no further then the Jesus of the Bible. Whom did he associate with? He associated with the publicans and the sinners, the tax collectors and the oppressed, the prostitues and the widows, the homeless and the street people etc. These are the kinds of folks that Jesus in the parable of the wedding feast invited to the feast. Consider the work of the Salvation Army. They probably more then others fulfill the responsibilities of the Christian way of life. They do not hide in isolation or tie their members down or try to stop them from thinking. If Jesus had isolated himself etc. he would have been and Essene which he was not. That was their style but not his.
I see a problem when folks are afraid to broaden their minds; to learn not only from others but from resources. That coupled with the fear of death and damnation speak of a religion based on fear and not the free grace of God and His unconditional love.
The mainline churches encourage their folks to study and learn, to broaden their minds and to get into life. If God hadn't wanted us to use the intelligence he gave us then we should just become atomitons. As Christians we are to be in the world but not of the world. If we are not in the world then we cannot fulfill the requests of our Lord. I've heard here both implicitly and explicity how the reformers are wrong or treading on thin ice. What I have heard is everyone is out of step but me. It is a sad day when one has to denigrate other faiths as well as other Christian denominations to boost their own. That is not the Christian way. All we have to do is look at the life of Jesus to know better.
Imagine growing old and dying never having lived.
Shalom
Ted:-6
-
telaquapacky
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:00 pm
An Open Invitation
spot wrote: To be honest, if one lives each moment in the conscious knowledge that it may be one's last and that one may immediately be in the presence of the Lord, life is quite a different affair and far less pedestrian. I confess that I don't, but it has attractions, I could aspire to it, and it is a very SDA tenet. From that perspective, those who do and those who don't are beasts of very different aspect.Ha ha. Thank you, Spot, but I think I'm doing a very poor job of it. Buying a business a couple of years ago has put me deep in debt- a very bad condition indeed if there will be a time of (financial) trouble (we think there will be a severe time of trouble first before Jesus comes). Please pray for me- not that God will spare me disaster, but that whatever happens, I will be courageous and unshakable in my commitment to Christ.
Someone apparently said it sounds like I think everyone has the mark of the beast. You know something? Antichrist is as much a principle as it is an entity. Any time people obey men in place of God, or are led by religious leaders to do something that is clearly wrong and hurts people, that is antichrist. Babyrider brought to our attention how people in two Seventh-day Adventist churches and an SDA school conspired to cover up for a church school teacher that molested her. I'm very glad she brought that up, because it points out something very important. It can happen anywhere, and it's true- anyone can fall under the banner of antichrist- even Seventh-day Adventists.
Revelation presents things in contrasts. It presents the Seal of God. Then it presents in contrast, the mark of the beast. The more I studied it, the more I realized that it is pointless to tell someone, like some bumper stickers used to say, "Resist the mark 666." On the last day of earth's history there will be only two classes of people. Those who have the seal of God, and those who have the mark of the beast. If you don't have the seal of God (the Holy Spirit) automatically, by default, you will receive the mark of the beast.
What we need is to learn more about the Holy Spirit, and seek to give ourselves to Him to transform our lives.
Someone apparently said it sounds like I think everyone has the mark of the beast. You know something? Antichrist is as much a principle as it is an entity. Any time people obey men in place of God, or are led by religious leaders to do something that is clearly wrong and hurts people, that is antichrist. Babyrider brought to our attention how people in two Seventh-day Adventist churches and an SDA school conspired to cover up for a church school teacher that molested her. I'm very glad she brought that up, because it points out something very important. It can happen anywhere, and it's true- anyone can fall under the banner of antichrist- even Seventh-day Adventists.
Revelation presents things in contrasts. It presents the Seal of God. Then it presents in contrast, the mark of the beast. The more I studied it, the more I realized that it is pointless to tell someone, like some bumper stickers used to say, "Resist the mark 666." On the last day of earth's history there will be only two classes of people. Those who have the seal of God, and those who have the mark of the beast. If you don't have the seal of God (the Holy Spirit) automatically, by default, you will receive the mark of the beast.
What we need is to learn more about the Holy Spirit, and seek to give ourselves to Him to transform our lives.
Look what the cat dragged in.
An Open Invitation
tel:-6
Surprise, surprise. I actually agree with much of what you have written in that post.
Well put.
I don't agree with your stand on "Revelation". But, hey, think how dull and boring life would be if we all agreed.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Surprise, surprise. I actually agree with much of what you have written in that post.
Well put.
I don't agree with your stand on "Revelation". But, hey, think how dull and boring life would be if we all agreed.
Shalom
Ted:-6
-
telaquapacky
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:00 pm
An Open Invitation
If this thread is new to you and you don't care to wade through all the pages, the gist of it is that Bronwen invited different Christians on FG to talk about their churches and what they believed, in what at first seemed like an open-minded forum discussion. Some Protestants responded, whereupon Bronwen attacked their views from the standpoint that the Roman Catholic church is the only true church, an opinion Bronwen is certainly entitled to.
Then I got involved. Bronwen did not count on there being a Seventh-day Adventist in the group. Not that we're smarter or holier than anyone, but we "have the goods" on the papacy. There are two types of Protestant churches today- those who are trying to reconcile with Rome (and you cannot reconcile with Rome except on Rome's terms, which is acceptance of papal supremacy and apostleship, thus sinking the Protestant canoe to the bottom of the sea, and achieving through ecclesiastical diplomacy what they failed to achieve in ages past by the rack the sword and the stake) and the other group that makes no compromise with Rome. Of the latter, Seventh-day Adventists are probably the most outspoken and forthright. This isn't against people, but a system.
If this topic interests you, I recommend you check out my post in Adventism and Catholicism with the Adventist Review article on the Papacy as Antichrist. It answers many of the questions with the evidence which Bronwen asked me to supply.
Then I got involved. Bronwen did not count on there being a Seventh-day Adventist in the group. Not that we're smarter or holier than anyone, but we "have the goods" on the papacy. There are two types of Protestant churches today- those who are trying to reconcile with Rome (and you cannot reconcile with Rome except on Rome's terms, which is acceptance of papal supremacy and apostleship, thus sinking the Protestant canoe to the bottom of the sea, and achieving through ecclesiastical diplomacy what they failed to achieve in ages past by the rack the sword and the stake) and the other group that makes no compromise with Rome. Of the latter, Seventh-day Adventists are probably the most outspoken and forthright. This isn't against people, but a system.
If this topic interests you, I recommend you check out my post in Adventism and Catholicism with the Adventist Review article on the Papacy as Antichrist. It answers many of the questions with the evidence which Bronwen asked me to supply.
Look what the cat dragged in.
An Open Invitation
telaquapacky wrote: If this thread is new to you and you don't care to wade through all the pages, the gist of it is that Bronwen invited different Christians on FG to talk about their churches and what they believed, in what at first seemed like an open-minded forum discussion. Some Protestants responded, whereupon Bronwen attacked their views from the standpoint that the Roman Catholic church is the only true church.If this thread is new to you and you DO go through it from the beginning you will find no such thing.
tel, are you even aware that there is a commandment regarding false witness? I wonder.
tel, are you even aware that there is a commandment regarding false witness? I wonder.
An Open Invitation
Bronwen:-6
I concur. tel has failed to respond to your many challenges in any open way if at all. He is also accusing you of things that are not true. Typical??
Shalom
Ted:-6
I concur. tel has failed to respond to your many challenges in any open way if at all. He is also accusing you of things that are not true. Typical??
Shalom
Ted:-6
An Open Invitation
Ted wrote: 1. tel has failed to respond to your many challenges in any open way if at all.
2. He is also accusing you of things that are not true. Typical??
1. True but hardly surprising. How does one respond to scientific facts like the earth's antiquity? How does one support the claim that Miller was 'really describing something that happened in heaven' when he predicted the end of the world, this here world mind you, not heaven, at least three times? But this really refers to the other thread, and anyone wishing to read a list of all the challenges to Adventism to which neither tel nor anyone else has responded can do so there. I might add that several of these questions, for example how the SDA hierarchy is set up, and the SDA's attitude toward the Easter holiday, are not confrontational at all but merely an attempt to learn more about the SDA. So in this regard I bear no serious ill will toward tel. One cannot be expected to defend the indefensible. I would hold him in much higher regard, however, if he would have the integrity and the 'stones' (to use the Biblical term) to display some honesty for once by simply admitting that he has no answers.
2. This is a different matter entirely. This is the same type of slander for which the SDA has been known since it was spawned, but in this case directed at me personally. I would ask ANY contributor or reader of this thread who can substantiate tel's claim that...tel wrote: Some Protestants responded, whereupon Bronwen attacked their views from the standpoint that the Roman Catholic church is the only true church....to do so.
To most of those who responded, my only comment, if I commented at all, was to thank them for their participation. To those few, including tel of course, who decided to use the thread to attack my Church (which I had, of course, identified in the opening post), I responded by defending it, not proselytizing. I urge anyone who disagrees with that assessment to cut and paste any exchange here that supports tel's assertion.
I never dreamed when I began the post that it would be so long-running, and while I think most contributors would admit that it has gone way off topic, especially in the more recent pages, I think it's been a fine, interesting thread, and once again I thank everyone who contributed in the same spirit of good will with which the thread was launched.
2. He is also accusing you of things that are not true. Typical??
1. True but hardly surprising. How does one respond to scientific facts like the earth's antiquity? How does one support the claim that Miller was 'really describing something that happened in heaven' when he predicted the end of the world, this here world mind you, not heaven, at least three times? But this really refers to the other thread, and anyone wishing to read a list of all the challenges to Adventism to which neither tel nor anyone else has responded can do so there. I might add that several of these questions, for example how the SDA hierarchy is set up, and the SDA's attitude toward the Easter holiday, are not confrontational at all but merely an attempt to learn more about the SDA. So in this regard I bear no serious ill will toward tel. One cannot be expected to defend the indefensible. I would hold him in much higher regard, however, if he would have the integrity and the 'stones' (to use the Biblical term) to display some honesty for once by simply admitting that he has no answers.
2. This is a different matter entirely. This is the same type of slander for which the SDA has been known since it was spawned, but in this case directed at me personally. I would ask ANY contributor or reader of this thread who can substantiate tel's claim that...tel wrote: Some Protestants responded, whereupon Bronwen attacked their views from the standpoint that the Roman Catholic church is the only true church....to do so.
To most of those who responded, my only comment, if I commented at all, was to thank them for their participation. To those few, including tel of course, who decided to use the thread to attack my Church (which I had, of course, identified in the opening post), I responded by defending it, not proselytizing. I urge anyone who disagrees with that assessment to cut and paste any exchange here that supports tel's assertion.
I never dreamed when I began the post that it would be so long-running, and while I think most contributors would admit that it has gone way off topic, especially in the more recent pages, I think it's been a fine, interesting thread, and once again I thank everyone who contributed in the same spirit of good will with which the thread was launched.
-
telaquapacky
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:00 pm
An Open Invitation
In another Adventist Review article, it is shown how Roman Catholicism usurps the place of Christ, and teaches that the RC church is the sole dispenser of the saving grace of God on earth. This emerged out of recent developments (as of 2000) between Lutherans and Roman Catholics.
I submitted a detailed article entitled, "By Grace Alone," by Clifford Goldstein, in the "Adventism and Catholicism" thread. This should be very interesting reading if you are interested in the gospel, and just how diametrically opposite and irreconcilable the Roman Catholic view is from the Protestant view.
I submitted a detailed article entitled, "By Grace Alone," by Clifford Goldstein, in the "Adventism and Catholicism" thread. This should be very interesting reading if you are interested in the gospel, and just how diametrically opposite and irreconcilable the Roman Catholic view is from the Protestant view.
Look what the cat dragged in.
An Open Invitation
Bronwen wrote: I never dreamed when I began the post that it would be so long-running, and while I think most contributors would admit that it has gone way off topic, especially in the more recent pages, I think it's been a fine, interesting thread, and once again I thank everyone who contributed in the same spirit of good will with which the thread was launched.
Oh geeze, Bron, religion always gets the blood pumping around here! I think the discussion has been very interesting, and while I haven't really contributed much, I have learned a lot about both sides of the argument. Frankly, I hope it continues, so long as it stays in the fairly civil tone it's maintained to this point.
Bravo, guys.
Oh geeze, Bron, religion always gets the blood pumping around here! I think the discussion has been very interesting, and while I haven't really contributed much, I have learned a lot about both sides of the argument. Frankly, I hope it continues, so long as it stays in the fairly civil tone it's maintained to this point.
Bravo, guys.
[FONT=Arial Black]I hope you cherish this sweet way of life, and I hope you know that it comes with a price.
~Darrel Worley~
[/FONT]
Bullet's trial was a farce. Can I get an AMEN?????
We won't be punished for our sins, but BY them.
~Darrel Worley~
[/FONT]
Bullet's trial was a farce. Can I get an AMEN?????
We won't be punished for our sins, but BY them.
An Open Invitation
telaquapacky wrote: In another Adventist Review article, it is shown how Roman Catholicism usurps the place of Christ, and teaches that the RC church is the sole dispenser of the saving grace of God on earth.Tel, I wonder whether you'd look at http://www.thirdangelsmessage.com/books ... n_book.pdf (it's quite a large download, and I don't expect you to read it all) and give a cursory glance at the style. Would you regard that as mainstream within your tradition? It does convey a contempt for Rome. It also details certain archaeological adventures within Jerusalem that frankly I find unbelievable (I make no comment on the other discovery sections) - would that information be widely regarded as evidence, within your community? Page 76 would be a good place to drop in. I get no impression that the authors are attempting allegory, they portray their story as entirely factual:
Ron was overwhelmed by what he saw. The Ark was against a wall in the chamber, directly under the earthquake crack in the roof where the blood of Jesus had flowed down onto the Mercy Seat. The other temple furnishings were in their correct positions in relation to the Ark. The rest of the objects were laid along one of the walls.
Ron was overwhelmed by what he saw. The Ark was against a wall in the chamber, directly under the earthquake crack in the roof where the blood of Jesus had flowed down onto the Mercy Seat. The other temple furnishings were in their correct positions in relation to the Ark. The rest of the objects were laid along one of the walls.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.