 |
|
shawnmmcc
|
|
Shi Huangdi, I had thought that was the difference between Church Law and Dogma. Vatican 1 "clarified" it, though I would argue that it was new Dogma, that the Pope by fiat can add to Dogma. I have a gay ex-Catholic minister friend who I'm going to be seeing in the near future, he knows Church history MUCH better than I do, I dragging things up from long ago. Church Councils had pretty much been required to make any changes to Dogma, and while Church Law was pretty high up on the hierarchy of "we're right, and don't you dare think otherwise" it at least was subject to change. Dogma isn't. It may take centuries to admit a Pope made a mistake, but has Dogma ever been subjected to "correction" ?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ben Kenobi
|
 |
McGregornobi!
Oct 2002
time: 21:33
|
|
UR:
quote:
I reject the notion of Original Sin. First of all, as I pointed out before, it seems highly unlikely that the big G is less enlightened than us, and we surely do not blame people for the crimes their ancestors commit. Secondly, again, as I pointed out before, how would anybody not figure out Adam and Eve had to eat from that tree? It was bound to happen. Supposedly YHWH is omniscient, surely he would have known beforehand.
|
Several questions bound up in this statement. Let's see if I have them all.
1. Why would an omniscient God not prevent man from sinning?
2. Why would the sin of Adam and Eve pass on to future generations?
3. Does God's omniscience erase free will?
Answer to one. God gave man free will, thus putting a voluntary restraint on his own power. Therefore, God would not prevent Adam and Eve from sinning should they want to.
Answer to two. This question is quite a bit more difficult to answer. Before we can answer this, we must first understand the sin of Adam and Eve. When you look at the lie of the serpent tempting Eve, he offers Eve the power to become like God. Eve's sin is not so much disobedience, but a rejection of humanity. By wanting to be like God, she succumbs to a dissatisfaction with being man.
With the entrance of sin into the world, this dissatisfaction with man cannot be seperated from humankind. No longer does man share such an intimate union with God, as before the fall, but the fall remains a barrier between God and man.
Now, you worry that God is not 'enlightened' in visiting the sin of Adam upon everyone else. It would be if he refused to offer redemption. Everyone has an opportunity to restore their proper relationship with God, as before the fall, in heaven, by believing in Christ.
Answer to three. Tough question. In my understanding, God sees things as we do them, not before we do them. It makes no sense to apply words of time to God because God is outside time.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CharlesBHoff
|
|
el paso texas
May 2002
time: 05:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asher
The assumption that God is omnipotent is not safe to begin with, therefore there is no reason we should expect God to be omnipotent and all people on this earth to have native Christian morals (particularly when evidence is to the contrary).
QED. |
You are every near to than truth of something.
Nobody know what religion God support, he might support all of then or none or anywhere in between.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ben Kenobi
|
|
McGregornobi!
Oct 2002
time: 21:33
|
|
quote:
Again this makes absolutely no sense at all. First of all, we don't sentence people for crimes they didn't commit. Secondly, YHWH could just easily cleared us of our "sins."
|
Are you sinless UR? Then you are not being sentenced for your original sin, but rather for the sins you commit.
quote:
On a deeper theologial level, if we assume that YHWH is both omniscient and omnipotent, surely he could have chosen, among infinite possibities, the one world that we humans did not, do not, and will not commit any "sins."
|
Right, a world of automatons that always do the will of God. If we have freewill that has to allow us to commit sins.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CharlesBHoff
|
|
el paso texas
May 2002
time: 05:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Japher
Basis? What basis is there that Jesus DID die on the cross? It's a total he said, she said argument.
Muhammed didn't have any pyrotechnics thus he's not a prophet? How are we to know that Moses and Whalebow, I mean Elijah, really performed those miracles and just weren't legends added to a powerful prophet? Embelishments... Most of the bible is written centuries after the fact and on hersey.
But, I digress. Ffaith is something that cannot be tackled, it's like you saying this; "p", is the letter "p", and I say, "no it's not." |
The founder of Islam didnot know how to read or write which isnot unused back them as 99% of the people didnot know how to read or write. The Koran was being written down while He live on earth. Ather every relevation he got from God where memoreise by some of his foolower and at the same time scribe wrote it down on bark, leaves, animal skins. The first Quran was printed 30 year after the founder die, compare that to the old textium and new textium. We donot know how long as the relevation the first jew prophet was wriiten down it might haven being a thousand year time different. The new textium wasnot written down untril about 400 year after Christ death.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ben Kenobi
|
|
McGregornobi!
Oct 2002
time: 21:33
|
|
cinch:
quote:
1. It had an appealing message: forgiveness and all that.
|
How can there be forgiveness without Christ? How can we be saved, if Christ did not rise? You need to read more of Paul. He argues this in 1 Corinthians.
quote:
and also the ruling classes who could use it to passify the population
|
So why did they spend 300 years martyring believers if Christianity would pacify the masses?
quote:
and justify wars (like most religions).
|
Why would they need Christianity in order to do this?
By whom? The apparition of Jesus?
quote:
2. We don't know that they knew he was going to come back to life.
|
Read my statement. They believed he was the promised Messiah, and that he would not die in the first place. You are very correct that they did not believe Christ would come back from the dead. Such a resurrection was unprecedented.
quote:
Who knows how much they knew/believed?
|
We do have some independent records of what Jews would believe at that time. We also have their own testimonies.
quote:
That's not necessarily true. You can believe someone to have supernatural powers, and still want to help them when they're in trouble.
|
If you help him, he's not God. God should not need your help. God can rescue himself.
Matthew 27:40
"those who passed by hurled insults at him, shaking their heads and saying, 'You who are going to destroy the temple and build it in three days, save yourself! Come down from the cross if you are the Son of God!' "
And again.
Matthew 27:42-3
" 'He saved others,' they said, 'but he can't save himself! He's the King of Israel! Let him come down now from the cross and we will believe in him. He trusts in God. Let God rescue him.' "
quote:
OR maybe the apostles wanted to let him die, but Nicodaemus and Joey of Arimathea went up and took him down, for they knew less of his 'plans'. Plenty o' options here.
|
Ummm. Guards. Angry Jews. Lots of passerby. No chance of getting to the cross.
quote:
3. Paul was an able, slick trickster who co-opted Christ's message for his own needs.
|
Safe, comfortable, prosperous, Jew becomes tortured, beaten and persecuted Christian. Real smart career move for a slick trickster.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CharlesBHoff
|
|
el paso texas
May 2002
time: 05:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
No. Try 25-30 years for the synoptics, and 60 years for John.
Heck, the very first manuscript we have dates back to the 2nd Century.
http://www.bible.org/netbible/manuscr.htm |
Early Christian was decide into many different cults. Some didnot believe in the three God in One deal. In Egpty they recover in the 1950's old written of the cult of Christian that didnot agree with Cathorism(both Roman and Greek) beilfs. I was talking about the officate verson of the bibble which didnot happen untril 400 year as Christ death. Did you ever hear of the Lost Books of the Bibble. They didnot put every written material of that time about Christ in the Bibble. When the first officate Quran was printed there where still thousand's of people around who memoryism everything the Founder of Islam ever said, includeing some of his wifes. One then was recognite as than leading religish schoralty of her time. They read the Officiate copy of the Quran an they would have notice any change in it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CharlesBHoff
|
|
el paso texas
May 2002
time: 05:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Thriller
Not such a big deal there. I think the idea was that god was testing Abraham, yada yada yada.
How about this one: God's representative on earth is the Pope, who is therefore infallible. I guess that includes all the 5 year old popes throughout the middle-ages, the popes who murdered their predecessors to gain power, and the homosexual paedophilic popes who couldn't help themselves? Not to mention the fact that at various times throughout history there have been multiple popes at the same time claiming to be the god's representative.
Hmmm, maybe that's why Henry VIII decided to get rid of catholicism. Oh no I forgot....that was for a much holier reason....he wanted to get divorced! |
There was one Pope who die of than heart attack while haveing than sexual relateship with than married woman in either the very late roman empire or very early dark age.He acturaly die in the woman bed and arms while inside of her.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
How many commandments does Christ offer? Two or one? |
I don't know, but I'd say two, among the lines of "love each other" and "love God". But I fail how is the second relevant to the first one.
You'll tell me that I'm not consistent as I (and many fellow agnostics who acknowledge that Christianty has great humanist values) accept only part of Christ's message.
And I would reply you "bullshit": I take parts of one's arguments everywhere.
For instance, I think Marx analysis of historical dynamism is right, except that I don't believe in his belief that historical dynamism will end with communism.
For instance, I agree with the French Communist Party's programme, except for the European portion of it as I think it goes entirely in the wrong way.
For instance, I think Civ3 has brought great things to the Civ franchise, but the lack of unit-trading sucks, etc.
When I forgive someone about some offense, I am not thinking at all of Christ or of God. They simply do not enter my motivations at all, and I couldn't care less about what other things the great spreader of this idea (read Jesus) said.
How do you explain that?
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:33.
Apolyton Time is 00:33. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
23-01-2004 13:40
That must be because I want to enter heaven after my death.
|