|
Post by Tony Carpenter on Feb 3, 2005 23:25:42 GMT -5
Honestly, I think you two are on two completely different wavelengths. Just from reading your posts I don't see any of the messages you guys are sending to each other getting across.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Feb 4, 2005 0:00:49 GMT -5
thats not really the point Tony. not for me anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Mike West on Feb 4, 2005 0:12:16 GMT -5
Simon, reading your post it sounds like your saying that you, and other people are or could be without sin, and if that is the case I would then have to ask you what it is you call sin ? We all have sinned, it is the nature of our flesh. How do you know right from wrong ? What standard do you go by ? You talked about why God made laws, can you imagine our society without laws, what do you think our laws were based off of ? Just like to hear some answers
|
|
|
Post by Tony Carpenter on Feb 4, 2005 0:20:04 GMT -5
Then again people do kill abortionists, despite Gods laws, and the fact that they are breaking the one that they are trying to defend. People do bad things in the name of God and his laws.
|
|
|
Post by Bill Maenza on Feb 4, 2005 7:54:13 GMT -5
RT - Except of course for the fact that Luthers only clarified what the scriptures already taught. and the Catholic Church wants to add or take away teachings.
WM - Again Ryan, you never seem to amaze me as to how wrong a person could be! No, he did not clarify what scriptures taught, he changed it to say what he wanted it to be. That was due to his own issues. The Catholic church tkes away teachings? Interesting. Tell me then: Why did Luther remove books from the bible? More clarifying I guess. Hmmm, maybe, just maybe it was because the books did not support his beliefs. Most references to Blessed Mary , confession and other "Catholic only" beliefs are supported there. Naturally arguing them with you would be pointless as you don't recognize them. I don't know the scriptural quote, but I know that it is mentioned that no one should add or remove one word to the teachings and scriptures. So he Luther only added one word and removed 6 books!
TC - Just from reading your posts I don't see any of the messages you guys are sending to each other getting across. WM - Tony, we won't get our messages across to eachother. I try to keep an open mind with everything, my faith included. Ryan however is as closed minded as they come. Any view that does not coincide with his is wrong. Ahh, to be young! We were all there at one time. Hopefully he will grow out of it.
Bill
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Feb 4, 2005 8:17:15 GMT -5
WM - Tony, we won't get our messages across to eachother. I try to keep an open mind with everything, my faith included. Ryan however is as closed minded as they come. Any view that does not coincide with his is wrong. Ahh, to be young! We were all there at one time. Hopefully he will grow out of it.
Though i know why you said this I find it rather insulting.
My mind is totally openas far as things line up to the word of God.
Luther removed those books becuase they dont line up with the rest of scripture, if it was him that removed them i dont know. But those books are not considered inspired by God.
Paul said if any man of angel in heaven preach to you another Gospel, Christ and him Crucified let him be acursed. If anyone teaches that mary has anything to do with our redeemtion and sanctification other than simply being Jesus mother. He is accursed! Luther recognised the teachings of Paul. and the other apostles.
|
|
|
Post by Bill Maenza on Feb 4, 2005 8:29:24 GMT -5
Ryan,
Sorry. My statement came off harsh after I read it and I did not mean for it to. Please accept my apology.
RT - the books are not inspired by God WM - Come on now, now you know which were and wwhich were not? How? You can accept some but not the others? Do you see how silly that sounds? Luther decided they did not fit his beliefs. He removed them. You were not exposed to them, yet you deem them not inspired. They were considered inspired for 1600 years. Luther even admitted later in life that Christianity was in more disarray from what he had done than before hand.
I'll agree to disagree, but don't soap box here and tell people that you are an authority on Catholic teachings. You can have your beliefs, no problem here. Don't stand here though and berate my faith as though you are in the know. You don't see me bad mouthing your beliefs as the Christian flavor of the month, show me the same respect - please.
Bill
Bill
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Feb 4, 2005 14:08:20 GMT -5
I didnt take offense to your post.
I dont mean to come off like bad mouthing anything other than false teachings.
I have much respect for you Bill. Never do i intend to offend you. If I say something about the Catholic Church please do not take direct offense to it.
I told you that i would try to keep the Catholic Church off of the public forum unless i was provoked. I apologize if i have not abided by this. I also promised my mom that when she got married i wouldnt preach to her husband who is catholic. As torturing as it is i dont ever bring it up. but from what i gather of him he Identifies the erroneous teachings as well.
The word of God declares what is and is not Holy and Inspired. If the other books arent backed up by the rest of scripture why should they be considered holy and inspired?
|
|
|
Post by Bill Maenza on Feb 4, 2005 14:27:03 GMT -5
Ryan,
The books were (are) considered inspired until Luther said they were not.
You say your mom's husband relates to "erroneous" teachings. You are the one deeming them erroneous. We believe them to be just as inspired as every other writting.
Hmm, so you do as your mom asks you with her husband? Now isn't that in some bizarre way the way Catholics treat the Blessed Mother? We ask her to intercedd, she asks her Son and hopefully they do it for her. Get it :-)
Bill
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Feb 4, 2005 15:15:12 GMT -5
UUHHH NO! I want to say i dont worship my mother but you might get offended so i wont Jesus is od he has no authority over him (without getting into the depths of debate one the trinity i know you believe in the trinity and all that so lets leave it at that. Mary is not my authority nor is she Jesus authority.
|
|
|
Post by Bill Maenza on Feb 4, 2005 15:26:02 GMT -5
Dude, You just don't get the difference between worship and honor...you honor your mother (I hope) by doing as she asked.No where was worship mentioned.
Try the objective approach. Look at the words and not what you want them to be. I have chosen my words carefully.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Feb 4, 2005 16:18:16 GMT -5
I was just picking with ya Bill. i apologize if that was out of place.
|
|
|
Post by Bill Maenza on Feb 4, 2005 18:14:34 GMT -5
No offense taken. It's just that you use words that I don't use for a reason (ie: worship instead of honor). They may seem subtle but they are very different.
|
|
|
Post by simon on Feb 4, 2005 18:32:23 GMT -5
I am going to try and pull both post together here:
Yes Tony I have seen Dogma an ok flick.
That kind of is my point, how can we believe what the bible says, there are so many versions and contradictions not only in print but in actions. The best light I can see any religious writings or beliefs in is, as a set of fables for a lack of a better phrase, stories with morals that are trying to tell the reader how to act properly and the ills of acting to the contrary. There is no question in my mind that a great deal of the current laws stem from religious moralities, but back in ancient civilizations what tools did they really have to prevent very questionable behavior, what ramifications was there for many questionable actions? All they had to prevent chaos was the fear of god, his wrath, and eternal damnation.
Mike I have never sinned, because I do not believe in sin, to me sin is a man made premise used to scare people into behaving as others expect you to. I certainly do not believe in Adam and Eve, to believe in sin would mean that you are willing to accept that there is an all powerful being keeping track of these transgressions and judging you for them, a position I just cannot fathom, not to keep beating this drum but by all accounts a repeated child killer can repent to god for his sins and get into heaven and I cannot because I lusted after a woman, had premarital sex and I am not willing to throw myself on the mercy of an invisible entity? I still do not understand how that is logical to anyone.
As I said above certainly many civilized laws come from the moralities of religion but I would offer that the moralities of religion came from the laws of man. There are two definitive positions in the laws of man , 1, Survival of the fittest, “I can do anything I choose until some one is capable of stopping me”, 2, Limitations of individual rights, “my rights end where yours begin”. Other than our civilized laws I live by the limitations of individual rights. Certainly there are some variations in between and there should be flexibility for common sense. I cannot murder people because then I am invading their right to life, but if they threaten mine I have the right to defend and protect myself even if it means their death. I cannot take what does not belong to me, now if my child desperately needs medicine that is locked inside of a cabinet and the person that owns those goods is not around to ask, you would hope a reasonable person would understand the life of your daughter is more important than his lost possession.
If every time you had your two neighbors over to your house to watch a football game one never brings anything but does nothing wrong and the other brings something but he steals from you, time and time again after he has sold off your items and could not repay you for your loss he comes to you apologizes and begs your forgiveness, and each time you granted it, how long would it be before you put a stop it, which guy would you rather have in your house? Why should god be any different, because he is better than us, he will accept the repeated repenting thief with absolutely no sincerity for his actions over the man that never harmed you but never gave of himself?
Many groups took what they wanted from these basic teachings and interpreted them as they choose plus added variations on the penalties and rational, hence why we get to sit here and argue about these points, this is why I have in a sense evolved my arguments from quoting inconsistencies in scriptures or printed text and have moved on to the logical and practical applications of the basic principles.
Ryan you seem to have a significant concern for the Mormon Religion, my question is why, what is it about it in general that leads to you so vehemently dismissing their beliefs? To be honest your position that the bible is absolutely perfect and accurate to its word only sounds slightly less crazy to me than the beliefs of the Mormon church. No disrespect intended but everything is about perceptions.
Bill being a Catholic with an infallible Pope, what if the Vatican suddenly went crazy and started proclaiming positions that were horribly objectionable to you as you sit now, would you follow along, would you renounce god or would you simply keep your relationship with god away from the changes that you cannot come to agree with? I think I know the answer and that is what I would consider a health relationship with your beliefs.
For the record I have no concerns with people that say “I have my own personal relationship with god” one that is not emphatically bound by the beliefs or directions of anyone or anything else, said relations like all good ones, are on terms only known by the two in the relationship, a level of understanding and a mutual consideration for each other, and this relationship has no need to be quantified to anyone else. I am very happy for people that are pleased with this portion of their lives and or those that gather their strength to deal with this sometime challenging world through their relationship with god, I say hey whatever gets you through is ok as long as you are not harming anyone else.
My intentions are not to make you change your mind, only to make you think by challenging that which you believe and at the same time I am challenging my own beliefs by inviting you to question them. “The day we stop learning is the day we stop living.”
|
|
|
Post by CHRISTIAN BINNIE on Feb 4, 2005 19:17:30 GMT -5
|
|