MovieChat Forums > God's Not Dead 2 (2016) Discussion > Do all Christians believe in the rapture...

Do all Christians believe in the rapture?

posted 9 years ago by brightwhitehorses
251 replies | jump to latest

You know that thing where Christians believe that they will be zapped without their clothes to Heaven? Or is that just a certain sect that believes that?

[–] tracyr88 9 years ago

No, all Christians do not. What most people believe about the rapture (disappearing, leaving clothes behind, etc.) actually came from the Left Behind book series. Somehow it seems to have become canon among certain Christian sects.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] tracyr88 9 years ago

It's so weird how Jesus never thought to mention any of that...

[–] BCMiles75 9 years ago

Yes he did.....Luke 17:26-35

Just as it was in the days of Noah, so also will it be in the days of the Son of Man. People were eating, drinking, marrying and being given in marriage up to the day Noah entered the ark. Then the flood came and destroyed them all.“It was the same in the days of Lot. People were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building. But the day Lot left Sodom, fire and sulfur rained down from heaven and destroyed them all.

It will be just like this on the day the Son of Man is revealed. On that day no one who is on the housetop, with possessions inside, should go down to get them. Likewise, no one in the field should go back for anything. Remember Lot’s wife! Whoever tries to keep their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life will preserve it. I tell you, on that night two people will be in one bed; one will be taken and the other left. Two women will be grinding grain together; one will be taken and the other left.”

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

I tell you, on that night two people will be in one bed; one will be taken and the other left. Two women will be grinding grain together; one will be taken and the other left.” Luke 17:26-35

Amen brother. Amen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6u0P9kwfF4s - Revelation, The Third Day

[–] brightwhitehorses 9 years ago

I think this world would be a kinder place without the religious.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] brightwhitehorses 9 years ago

Didn't God create the Devil? So it's His fault we are tormented by the Devil.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

God did not created the Devil. God created a beautiful angel but the angel turned prideful and wanted to run things. God did not let the fallen angel (the Devil) take charge so the Devil got very angry with God and came down from Heaven with a fury, headed for Earth. The Devil knows that his time is short; he plans to take as many people with him to Hell (a slang word for the Lake of Fire).

Reference to the Devil coming down to Earth: in Book of Revelation 12:12

Therefore rejoice, you heavens and you who dwell in them! But woe to the earth and the sea, because the devil has gone down to you! He is filled with fury, because he knows that his time is short."

The Devil causes problems, afflictions, pain and sufferings to get people to turn away from God. Once the Devil has succeeded in turning people away, he knows he's got them, and they will go with him to Hell. God doesn't want this for the people in the world. He wants us to turn to Him, talk to Him in prayer (talking just like you and me are), ask Him for help, thank Him when we receive a blessing from Him. All good things come from God. Most importantly, read the New Testament (Matthew 1:18 through John) because we learn about Jesus and His miracles. If anyone is challenged to read forward (Acts through Jude). The last book: Revelation is for the advanced, it was difficult for me and I been reading since 2003 but prayer (asking God) allowed me see how the world will be after the Rapture (pure chaos for 7 years).

Then another horse came out, a fiery red one. Its rider was given power to take peace from the earth and to make people kill each other. To him was given a large sword.

Reference to the fiery red one: in Book of Revelation 6:4

There are a few men that cause chaos in the world (after the Rapture), I pray to God, Jesus will take me home before these terrible things happen. I find these events very scary. God speaks of these things in His Book, the Bible. God does not lie. God wouldn't say "it's raining cats and dogs" because that would be a lie. God says just what He means.

One Nation Under God

[–] brightwhitehorses 9 years ago

Are you saying that God is not Omnipotent? He didn't know that Lucifer was going to become the Devil when he created him?

[–] archer1812 9 years ago

I think that you meant to say Omniscient. Which is also another attribute of God.
So yes,it is silly to argue that God didn't know what would happen to Lucifer before he created him. He knew how it was going to turn out, yet he created him nonetheless. So ultimately yes, God created the Devil.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

To Brightlighthorses:

Are you saying that God is not Omnipotent? He didn't know that Lucifer was going to become the Devil when he created him?

Edit Answer: Oh, how great are God's riches and wisdom and knowledge! How impossible it is for us to understand his decisions and his ways! Romans 11:33

Reference: http://biblehub.com/romans/11-33.htm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjR_A2pGPrY - my hope is found in Jesus

2 Timothy 2:23-25

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

Praise God, Doctor Charles F. Stanley Church with over 150,000 members in his congregation, Pastor Stanley has been saved since he was 12 years old and he is now 83 years old.

Then you should be relieved to know that Charles Stanley has recommended my publications and those of my principal co-author. They are sold in the bookstore there at First Baptist Church of Atlanta. I've also been invited to speak at First Baptist on multiple occasions.

So apparently Rev. Stanley disagrees with you.

Once again you display the fact that you are high on condemnation of your Christian brethren when they don't agree 100% with your personal beliefs---but low on knowledge of the scriptures and low on spiritual discernment.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

To Science-forum:

You say that Pastor Stanley invited your pubs but how do I know that is a fact and not a tale? Where is your proof of this?

Pastor Stanley not agreeing with me is another tale of yours? Let's keep other folks that are NOT present, out of our discussions, shall we?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3M__eHGicWc - Third Day band

Ephesians 5:19
1 Corinthians 13:14
Proverbs 3:5

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

You do not see God's truth. You do not hear or understand God's truths.

Interesting. I had concluded the same about you.

You have been taught by public books...

What exactly is a "public" book? Do you prefer PRIVATE books?

Can you cite anywhere in the Bible where books---whether "public" or "private"---are condemned by God?

Are you simply making up things as you go along?

instead of a Pastor...

I too an ordained minister. So why should anyone assume that Charles Stanley is automatically superior?

And yes, I studied and worked (and worshipped God together) under multiple pastors---and I served as a pastor in the years before I became a seminary professor. (Has Charles Stanley held any faculty appointments? By your criteria, once again, Stanley has nothing on me. )

..who has his PH.D and masters

No. Charles Stanley does NOT have a Ph.D.!

Yet again you don't know what you are talking about. Moreover, many of us have kidded Stanley that he has a rather worthless Th.D. from Luther Rice Seminary. (LRS has never awarded Ph.D.s) Luther Rice Seminary is only slightly above the level of a diploma mill. (To be fair, it is more academically respectable today than it was when Stanley got his pseudo-doctorate there. Ask ANY seminary president in America if he would hire a professor whose doctorate is from Luther Rice and he will laugh at you. Indeed, NONE of the Southern Baptist denomination schools even consider Luther Rice Th.D.s for their faculty positions in OT, NT, and ST. You MIGHT find an occasionally instance of a LRS degree holder being appointed to a Homiletics or Practical Theology lectureship or adjunct post.)

You will find that many seminary presidents like to get their so-called "doctorates" at Luther Rice Seminary because---unlike a real Ph.D. which is VERY competitive and hard to even qualify for acceptance at a strong doctoral program, and which may take 3 to 6 years to complete---Luther Rice awards "doctorates" for very little campus attendance over a few Christmas breaks, a summer session, and a few "term papers." It is a "solution" for non-academics who need to look "prestigious" when they approach donors for money. That is why lots of ministry leaders needing a "Dr." send their money to Luther Rice Seminary instead of enrolling at a REAL doctoral program at a top seminary (e.g., Gordon-Conwell, Denver Seminary, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, or even one of the Southern Baptist schools such as SBTS.)

By the way, since you are trying to play a comparison of CV game, in addition to trumping Stanley in terms of a REAL Ph.D., I have TWO Masters degrees relevant to my academic career and Biblical studies research.

So, how many doctorates and master's degrees do you have? (Yet you claim to be qualified to judge me. Yet the Bible tells me, "Let no man judge you.")

... in the study of the nature of God and religious belief.

Do you really think Charles Stanley has anything but dime-a-dozen academic "credentials"? He's not a biblical studies scholar and you will NEVER find any of his books used as textbooks at any top seminary in the world. He's a pastor, not a scholar.

Personally, I like Charles Stanley. Since retirement, I've not had any contact with him but we still have a lot of mutual friends. (Also, when he was heavily criticized by Chuck Colson and others for his divorce and later for the rift with his son, I publicly defended him. I rarely take "sides" in divorces---especially in a public sense---but I have no hesitation saying that he was the innocent party and that his ex-wife had serious personal problems for which I don't blame Stanley.)

Praise God, Doctor Charles F. Stanley Church with over 150,000 members in his congregation, Pastor Stanley has been saved since he was 12 years old and he is now 83 years old.

I have been saved since I was nine years old and am a nonagenarian. Does that mean that I win?

(Seriously, is that how you judge spiritual maturity? Does my getting saved at a younger age and being older thereby make me superior to Stanley? Is that your "logic"?)

Anyway, seeing how you so value Charles Stanley---and so do I by the way---you should be relieved to know that Charles Stanley has recommended my publications and those of my principal co-author. They are sold in the bookstore there at First Baptist Church of Atlanta. I've also been invited to speak at First Baptist on multiple occasions, although I've probably not spoken there since the 1980's. (My last appearance at First Baptist was more a lecture than a sermon. It was a special event for a lot of the pastoral staff and seminary student interns.)

So......apparently Rev. Stanley disagrees with you about me.

Once again you display the fact that you are high on condemnation of your Christian brethren when they don't agree 100% with your personal beliefs---but low on knowledge of the scriptures and low on spiritual discernment.

And clearly I am far more familiar (and personally acquainted) with Stanley than you are or ever will be.

Does that matter? Not really. Indeed, most of what you wrote doesn't matter. You are babbling self-righteously, trying to elevate yourself and your favorite minister by putting down others. I do know Charles Stanley well enough to say that he would NEVER approve of what you are doing here.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

To Science-forum:

For those that came across this post for the first time:

I NEVER said "You have to agree with me 100%" Science-forum is putting words in my mouth.

What happen is: Someone posted "Do all Christians believe in the Rapture?"
Science-forum gave what he learned in school, then, I said "I believe in the Rapture" and gave bible scriptures. There are many different Churches in the United States, as you know so all these Churches have their own interpretations. These Churches believe in God but have different practices and interpret the bible, very differently. God inspired men what to write. Consequently, God can interpret the bible to us, too, all we have to do is read it. What Science-forum teaches is dates, history, etc. Jesus didn't learn from studying.

The Jews therefore marveled, saying, “How is it that this man has learning, when he has never studied?” John 7:15

The Holy Spirit guides. God sends the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit teaches.

How does one get saved? Click on link below to see how:

https://www.intouch.org/read/content/how-do-i-accept-jesus-as-my-savior

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWnvmKoLWUU The Love of God, with lyrics, by MercyMe

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

You know that thing where Christians believe that they will be zapped without their clothes to Heaven? Or is that just a certain sect that believes that?

It is a relatively recent belief which developed among Dispensationalist Christians. John Darby developed this "doctrine" around 1830.

It would probably have disappeared into quiet extinction much like many other unusual and obscure beliefs which have developed among small religious sects through the centuries---if not for the fact that the Scofield Reference Bible promoted "Darbyism" (aka Dispensationalism) when the 1909 study Bible became very popular among American fundamentalists. The pretribulational rapture concept of "meeting Jesus Christ in the clouds" was not the only novel concept which was quickly introduced into many U.S. Sunday Schools by the Scofield Bible. It also popularized "The Gap Theory" of creation and Bishop Ussher's 4004 B.C. creation date. (Until the Scofield Bible, most American fundamentalists had never heard of Usher's chronology.) This set the stage for the rise of Young Earth Creationist and, eventually, the "creation science" of THE GENESIS FLOOD (1962, Henry Morris & John Whitcomb Jr.

Of course, many fundamentalist Christians have been taught that these beliefs had always been a part of Christian orthodoxy since the days of the Apostles and the early Church. Fortunately, most of the better evangelical seminaries teach the actual historical development of Christian theology and students see the documentary evidence for themselves. They also learn Koine Greek and first century culture, including the meaning of the idiom which English Bible "literalist" readers misconstrue as Christians somehow flying into the air and meeting Christ. You could compare the misunderstanding to someone reading the idioms "raining cats and dogs" and literally interpreting it as domestic animals falling from the sky. (The Greek idiom refers to the contemporary custom of a town greeting a visiting king or military leader by every walking just beyond the city limits and escorting the important person on his triumphal entry into the city. Because Jesus was visualized as returning from heaven, the abode of the Father, the figure of speech naturally imagined "meeting him in the air" to escort him in his return to earth. Of course, Pretribulational Rapturists complicate this by the assumption that the rapture and the second coming of Jesus are two different events, and even the very-hard-to-find-in-the-Bible distinction between "Christ coming FOR his saints and Christ coming WITH his saints." As already noted, most evangelical Christians are unable to find any support for these distinctions in the Bible.)

The vivid imagery of the raptured Christians flying into the air and leaving their clothes on the ground behind them was greatly bolstered by Hal Lindsey's best-selling The Late Great Planet Earth in the 1960's and a series of rough-cut but popular Christian movies based upon the pre-tribulational rapture theology. Decades later, the Left Behind series of novels greatly multiplied these beliefs until many Christians assume them Apostolic in origin.

It is difficult to determine the percentage of American evangelical and fundamentalist Christians who embrace Dispensationalism and the pre-tribulational rapture theology. I've seen estimates as high as 8% but haven't attempted any serious statistical research
on the numbers. However, there is a strong consensus that that percentage is dropping, especially among well-educated evangelicals who've attended a top seminary or read the Bible commentaries of the most respected evangelical scholars. (Post-tribulational theology continues to grow among evangelicals.)

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

"Billy Graham is a well-educated evangelical and respected evangelical scholars."

No. A_Chosen_One, that simply isn't true.

Billy Graham has NEVER been a "respected evangelical scholar" and has always denied being one. Also, he had limited, very average theological training and has NEVER claimed to be a scholar. The "Dr." title is purely honorary and from various educational institutions who award them liberally. (Honorary doctorates are a dime a dozen and we all receive them as simple courtesies for speaking at graduations, etc.) No seminary or evangelical graduate school to my knowledge uses any book by Billy Graham as a scholarly Bible commentary or theological textbook. (If you think Billy Graham was an "evangelical scholar" rather than a famous preacher and evangelist, then you probably think Chuck Swindoll and Pat Robertson are Biblical scholars. I attended the Evangelical Theological Society conference of Biblical scholars for some 40 years and not once do I recall any of those men even attending, let alone presenting a scholarly academic paper to their professor peers.)

You seem to be confusing pretribulational rapture types of pre-millenialist Dispensationalists with fundamentalist and evangelical Christians in general. And I have no idea where you got the idea that every Baptist fellowship fits that description.

What about non-Dispensational pre-trib pre-mills? What about post-trib pre-mill evangelicals? What about mid-tribbers? What about Amillennialists?

I can name many evangelical seminaries where the students (and the faculty) represent all or nearly all of those labels.

I spent a lifetime in evangelical academia as a Biblical studies professor and retired a decade ago. While it is possible that everything has changed since my retirement to where your claims are correct, I seriously doubt it.

The 8% figure which I cited probably came from a Barna Research source (I can't remember) and similar statistics have appeared in Christianity Today. If you have an updated statistic which you consider superior, by all means post your citation and explain your source. Why do you think your figures are more accurate than Barna and CT? Christian demographics has never been my field of specialization but I'd be amazed to hear that things have changed so radically since my retirement.

I've never had more than a loose acquaintance with Billy Graham on a personal basis, though we have had a great many mutual friends. (I say "had" because so many of them have passed away. For example, Kenneth Kantzer used to be General Editor for Christianity Today, which was actually founded with the help of Billy Graham's wealthiest benefactors. Billy always said that he was no scholar but he knew the Biblical scholars to call upon, which is how Carl F. H. Henry got the call from Billy when he first launched CT, and Billy knew the business people who had the deep pockets to launch a magazine which could counter the liberal theology of the mainline denomination periodical of those days: The Christian Century. So I appreciate what Billy Graham did to help boost evangelical scholarship even though he was never part of the theological academic world himself.)

I parted company with Billy Graham when he openly stated to Robert Schuler and Larry King on national TV that he no longer believed that Jesus Christ is the only way to God. (You can watch the video of those admissions on Youtube.) Franklin Graham appears to disagree with his father and continues to maintain "There is no other name under heaven given among men by which you must be saved." Franklin exhibits a great many theological differences with his father, and he too denies being a Biblical scholar.

You need to actually read the BillyGraham.org link you provided. It does NOT claim that Graham is a "respected Biblical scholar" or a "biblical scholar" of any sort. Moreover, ever since Graham's abandonment of Jesus-as-the-only-way, he is far less respected among Evangelical Christians. (I'd say that you will generally find that those who still hold him in the very highest regard are totally unaware of is shocking statements abandoning his former "one way" beliefs about Jesus.)

I'm not clear why you think Billy Graham's radio audiences are relevant to any of this. Lots of people have far greater "audiences" and other than indicating popularity of the individuals involved, I don't understand how that is meaningful.

Yes, you may have much more insider experience than I do--and more current familiarity with the statistics. So I'd appreciate your citations in updating my knowledge. So many of the academics I would have once consulted on such questions have died in the last 20 years. Many of the younger seminary and denominational presidents or only vaguely known to me.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

To Science-forum:

I did a google on your accusations against Billy Graham and I found this on youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrf60-zHl9A The FALSE titled called: Billy Graham Denies Christ -

Billy Graham NEVER denied Jesus. I listened to this youtube video. So Satan must be putting lies into people's heads about Billy Graham. Satan doesn't want people to hear what Billy Graham has to say about God/Jesus. That is why Satan uses the weak-minded to go against Billy Graham. Why? Billy Graham operates a variety of media and publishing outlets. According to his staff, more than 3.2 million people have responded to the invitation at Billy Graham Crusades to "accept Jesus Christ as their personal savior". As of 2008, Graham's estimated lifetime audience, including radio and television broadcasts, topped 2.2 billion people.

Franklin Graham’s Update on Billy Graham: ‘His Ministry Now Is Praying’
https://billygraham.org/story/franklin-grahams-update-on-billy-graham-his-ministry-now-is-praying/

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

To Science-forum:

Before I was saved, I kept an open mind to various Churches that I was invited to and Churches I attended on my own.

I attended a Church called "Assembly of God" A person talked in tongues which was scary to me because I did NOT understand what was going on.

I attended a Evangelist Church, a few times.

I, got baptized in 1990, after attending the Church of Christ.

My second husband and I, were both raised Catholic. My husband quit going to a Catholic Church because he said he couldn't remember what the Catholic Priest was saying/preaching. Consequently, we both started reading the bible. Things became a lot better for us because the bible (NT) kept reminding us how to love.

One of my sister-in-laws goes to a Presbyterian Church, she is very kind to others. I didn't hold anything against her because her beliefs were different.

In 2007, we started attending First Baptist Church of Rogers, Arkansas and the Associate Pastor told us that we had to get baptized again, so we did. This Church didn't preach on conviction so we went back to the Church of Christ. We did not correct or rebuke the Pastors but left quietly.

My ex-landlord is a Methodist, a minister, he had his own Church. He and his wife, became friends with us, even though our beliefs were different.

When we lived in Etowah, Tennessee, I wrote an Amish Elder. The Amish Elder said he would pray for my family. I have the highest respect for the Amish people because they are hardcore faithful believers (no electricity, no cars, no phones, no television, etc and very forgiving.)

My mother-in-law and my husband's sister, attend a Catholic Church. Their beliefs are very different than ours. My mother-in-law won't read Non-Catholic Books, written by Southern Baptist men (believers of God).

One of my husband's brothers and his wife, attend a small Church. I don't know the name of their Church but his wife likes talking about God and the Scriptures. We get along very well.

I believe, we can all show respect for our brothers and sisters in Christ. Although, it's a two-way street, meaning: it usually works when the opposing side, shows respect, too.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

I did a research on Science-forum charges against Billy Graham and I found Science-forum INCORRECT words: "Billy Graham Says Jesus Christ is Not the Only Way." WATCH and HEAR FOR YOURSELVES!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MZWug3QAvs - DECEIVING titled "Billy Graham Says Jesus Christ is Not the Only Way"

I watched this ENTIRE video and there is NO EVIDENCE that shows Science-forum is correct. On the contrary, in this video, shows Billy Graham giving various speeches in his old age, and GRAHAM SAYS: THERE IS ONLY ONE WAY TO HEAVEN THROUGH JESUS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0EPG8H2yT20 - this one is titled "Billy Graham denies Jesus" but I watched this whole video and Billy Graham does NOT deny Jesus. Instead, Billy Graham says "Jesus is the Way, to the truth and the Life." John 14:6

God said that there would be ANTICHRISTS, coming into the world. 1 John 2:18 These antichrists want to discredit godly men (like Billy Graham, etc) and godly women (like me) so that way you will NEVER hear the good news that God wants you to know about. That salvation is FREE and no matter what you did before, you can be FORGIVEN, through Jesus dying on the cross for your sins. Reading your bible daily, because through these bible readings: you are encouraged, strengthen, loved, comforted and so much more. It is important to read about Jesus and all the miracles he performed, you will find in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. It is good to associate with other believers too. Not just for fellowship but to worship God with beautiful hymns. Don't forget to talk to God in prayer, He wants to hear from you. Why not today?

https://powertochange.com/discover/faith/sinforgive/ -explains in more detail-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqDaDdfDr-g -HILLSONG-

PEOPLE: Don't let NO ONE discourage you from reading the Bible. The Devil doesn't want you to read God's Word so he uses people to discourage you from reading it.

[–] mustangguy809 9 years ago

What're your thoughts on Ronald Dart and his post-trib teachings? Do you find them different to other post-trib subscribers?

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

What're your thoughts on Ronald Dart and his post-trib teachings? Do you find them different to other post-trib subscribers?

I know nothing about Ron Dart's eschatology. I only know of him because while the cultic church of Herbert W. Armstrong eventually repented and official went "orthodox", Ron Dart stayed with the group's original doctrinal stance. Probably the best known aspect of his cult leader reputation comes from his denial of the Trinity.

I never knew him. He has some solid academic credentials if I recall correctly--far stronger than Stanley by the way, but a reminder of how little that can mean in some contexts--- but I don't remember him from ETS or AAR/SBL conferences. I do know he teaches a lot of bizarre stuff which sharply separate him from the Evangelical world. (It's been too long ago to remember for this old man but I recall him teaching strange stuff about Jesus "doing his own evangelism" separate from God the Father's evangelism. Perhaps he's changed over the years.)

If Dart is post-trib, that may be among the most "kosher" of his doctrines. Frankly, I wouldn't trust him on much of anything.

[–] JediColt 9 years ago

I will say that the Trinity can be one of the most difficult parts of Christianity to understand. Especially when you consider the struggle the Abrahamic faiths had in establishing monotheism when polytheism was so common. I think this is why critical thinking and analysis is so important for Christians. If you are just taking everything at face value and interpreting everything 100% literally then either individual parts of the Trinity lose their separation or we gloss over what they are. This is where some faiths demote Jesus to prophet or deny His divinity, because if Jesus is one God, and the Father in heaven is another, we aren't monotheistic anymore.

[–] archer1812 9 years ago

I honestly don't see what's so difficult to understand about th Trinity. I suppose is because I grew up with it.

[–] JediColt 9 years ago

I honestly don't see what's so difficult to understand about th Trinity. I suppose is because I grew up with it

The concept that there is one God in three persons, not three separate Gods that rule like a Triumvirate. Or that God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are all one person and these are just different names he goes by. So when Jesus came to earth it was just God in a human suit. Or that the Holy Spirit is just God's power.

There are a lot of different interpretations on the Trinity among the faiths so I can see where confusion comes in, but some have used this to deny Jesus' divinity or not accept the authority of Christ, that is where we get into trouble.

[–] mustangguy809 9 years ago

OK, thanks anyway. I always thought his eschatology was strange. I'm familiar with his influences as well and his anti-trinitarian views remind me a lot of Bart Ehrman's. Except Dart differs with what is seemingly adoptionist beliefs held by Ehrman in a few ways, like Christ's pre-existence as a deity. I listened to CEM's Born to Win for many years and, although I never agreed with some of those bizarre teachings (which really never changed that I noticed), there was a lot I did agree with him on. He was very wise on some philosophical issues. I was sad to hear of his passing in January.

"So it is wanted there where the power lies"

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] JediColt 9 years ago

No, most Christians don't believe in the Rapture. My denomination doesn't teach it. The verse from Thessalonians being quoted here is being used out of context. Paul's letter to the Thessalonians isn't talking about the rapture, he's saying that Jesus' death and resurrection proves that we are more than just these flesh and blood bodies, and as Christians we don't lose hope for our friends and family who die. We know that the dead will be called up to be with God in heaven.

The rest is about Jesus' second coming, which IS referenced in the Bible, a lot. Jesus' return will bring about peace as all will know he is the Lord. It says we will all go to be with Jesus, not that only Kirk Cameron and his friends will go while others stay and suffer.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

A_Chosen_One said:

"That person would be lying or deceiving. God would NOT lie or deceive us, never. Man says stuff like it's raining cats and dogs, those are man's ways, not God's ways."

It sounds like you have no knowledge of Biblical Hebrew or Biblical Greek. A linguistic IDIOM is not a "lie" or "deceiving".

Idioms are very common in the Bible. Read about the kings of Israel and Judah. Notice how often it makes statements like: "And David slept with his fathers" and "And Solomon slept with his fathers." Is that true? Did David get some rest by falling asleep alongside his father and grandfather? Did Solomon? NO! It is an IDIOM, just like "raining cats and dog" is an idiom.

Look up Greek and Hebrew idioms of the Bible in Google or in a Bible encyclopedia and you will avoid the kinds of erroneous claims you are making here. Better yet, educate yourself in the Biblical language and basic exegesis skills---and then you might be qualified to correct experienced Biblical scholars who know the originals far better than you do.

[–] JediColt 9 years ago

Just to expound on your point, not only does the Bible have many idioms, but Jesus taught in parables, so this notion that everything in the Bible should be taken literally doesn't make sense.

It was actually that rigid theology that led to Jesus' arrest and execution. Rest on the Sabbath is absolute no exceptions, so when Jesus heals on the Sabbath he commits a crime against God.

We've been down this road before. We resisted the earth being round because the Bible refers to it being flat.

Even today there are groups promoting geocentrism, flat earth, white supremacy and misogyny and using a literal interpretation of the Bible as their motivation.

If you are using Christianity to point out the shortcomings of others then another read through of the Gospels might be eye opening.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] JediColt 9 years ago

Well that got really ugly really fast. One minute we're discussing our favorite praise songs, the next you ask me if I hate Jesus?

I honestly didn't think I was being hateful, but I really don't want to argue with you. Two Christians fighting about who reads the Bible more and who is more loving isn't going to convert anyone.

No, I am not a college student. Geocentrism is the belief that the sun and other planets revolve around the earth. I can't remember the last time I went an entire day without reading something from the Bible, although some of that is from devotionals or study books that have scripture in them. The Parable of the Sower is my favorite as well.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

To JediColt:

Science is a study of facts. The Bible, the Word is God. How can Science and the Bible be parallel if miracles that Jesus performed cannot be proven? I couldn't find your original post about Science and the Bible being parallel so I picked this post to respond to your statement. Sorry that I'm just getting around to your post but I've been waiting for God to speak to my heart with an answer for you.

Jesus performed all those miracles. Miracles from the Bible CANNOT be proven so the Bible is NOT parallel with Science. JediColt, it has to be either Science by mankind OR the miracles that Jesus performed that you believe in, not both.

Miracle GOOGLE Definition: a surprising and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore considered to be the work of a divine agency.

You cannot serve two masters. Matthew 6:24 You could try to but would that be pleasing in God's eyes? We have to please God, not men. It is your choice but I'm just trying to help.

“Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’s sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of Him to whom we must give account” (Hebrews 4:13) God is Omniscient

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqaA8XBI15o - Your Words -

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

A_Chosen_One had mentioned that my replies to her posts didn't always produce a notification so I will repost one such reply below.

As to demonization of people, I've always affirmed what the Bible warns about such dangers but spent much of my life without any significant personal observation of such phenomena. That changed at mid-life, when I witnessed quite shocking manifestations among persons I knew very well. A few years later I saw even more startling demonic phenomena in west Africa where I was doing Bible translation work. I do believe that there are many false and sensationalist stories which circulate in some sectors, especially by charlatan prosperity-gospel "evangelists"---but that doesn't mean that the "real thing" is not also evident. I've been in areas of the world where manifestations seem to be rarely witnessed and others where they are quite ubiquitous. Some believers have seen many such situations and many other just as earnest and sincere believers have never witnessed any such things. I don't try to explain why that is the case but I simply accept it as the reality.

Of course, plenty of people would say that the demonic events I've witnessed were "a trick" or "mass hysteria" or "misinterpreted" or simply "mental illness". Yes, I've said similar things about particular examples. But I know what I've personally observed and what I saw harmonizes with the scriptures. I don't demand that anyone believe me. Those who think it all rubbish have free will to make up their own mind. Yet, I know what I've decided about the demonic. I consider it very real.

Now, as to past criticisms by those who presume to judge me:

___________________________

You do not see God's truth. You do not hear or understand God's truths.

Interesting. I had concluded the same about you.

You have been taught by public books...

instead of a Pastor...

I'm too an ordained minister. So why should anyone assume that Charles Stanley is automatically superior?

And yes, I studied and worked (and worshipped God together) under multiple pastors---and I served as a pastor in the years before I became a seminary professor. (Has Charles Stanley held any faculty appointments? By your criteria, once again, Stanley has nothing on me. )

..who has his PH.D and masters

... in the study of the nature of God and religious belief.

Praise God, Doctor Charles F. Stanley Church with over 150,000 members in his congregation, Pastor Stanley has been saved since he was 12 years old and he is now 83 years old.

I have been saved since I was nine years old and am a nonagenarian. Does that mean that I win?

(Seriously, is that how you judge spiritual maturity? Does my getting saved at a younger age and being older thereby make me superior to Stanley? Is that your "logic"?)

Anyway, seeing how you so value Charles Stanley---and so do I by the way---you should be relieved to know that Charles Stanley has recommended my publications and those of my principal co-author. They are sold in the bookstore there at First Baptist Church of Atlanta. I've also been invited to speak at First Baptist on multiple occasions, although I've probably not spoken there since the 1980's. (My last appearance at First Baptist was more a lecture than a sermon. It was a special event for a lot of pastoral staff and seminary student interns.)

So......apparently Rev. Stanley disagrees with you about me.

Once again you display the fact that you are high on condemnation of your Christian brethren when they don't agree 100% with your personal beliefs---but low on knowledge of the scriptures and low on spiritual discernment.

And clearly I am far more familiar (and personally acquainted) with Stanley than you are or ever will be.

Does that matter? Not really. Indeed, most of what you wrote doesn't matter. You are babbling self-righteously, trying to elevate yourself and your favorite minister by putting down others. I do know Charles Stanley well enough to say that he would NEVER approve of what you are doing here.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

To Science-forum:

For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. Matthew 7:2

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

So why should I believe you when you say you know Charles Stanley?

What makes you think that I would care whether you believe me?

Or anything that comes out of your mouth?

Obviously, everything I said about Charles Stanley is PUBLIC INFORMATION. If you are ignorant of these facts, look them up! Who I am and who you are is irrelevant. However, you ARE aptly illustrating the fact that many people reach their conclusions based upon their favorite Christian celebrity (e.g., Charles Stanley) and the traditions of their favorite sect.

I don't know you. You don't know me. Why don't we leave out the details of things that cannot be proved.

These are not mathematical claims, so proofs and "proved" is not at issue. The meanings of Hebrew and English words are easily determined from lexicographic . Biographical facts are just as easily confirmed. Yes, we live in a culture (assuming that you live within an English-speaking country or a British Commonwealth nation) which has become more and more relativistic in its epistemologies and very prone to assume that everything is subjective, nothing more than personal opinion. So I do understand your mindset. In another twenty years, I'll bet that you start changing your mind about this. (If you attend a major secular university, it won't take you twenty years. And if you ever teach undergrads, you'll be reminded within twenty minutes.)

I doubt that Billy Graham "put a smile" on God's face when he went on national TV and said that Jesus is NOT the only way to God and that other religions than those based upon the cross of Jesus Christ can also lead to salvation for his non-Christian friends.

(I saw the Graham broadcasts myself but if you didn't, you can easily confirm what I'm telling you by watching the video excerpts on Youtube and/or read the many newspapers, editorials, and blog articles about Graham's claims---as well as his differences with his son, Franklin Graham, who instead quotes Acts 4:12. If you disagree with Acts 4:12, I can see why you would prefer to embrace Billy Graham's "modernist" brand of Christianity to that found in the bible. The god who smiles to that defiance of scripture is not the God of the Bible. But no doubt you do know that. Defiance of the clear teachings of the scriptures is the product of the modern day relativism you embrace. Yes, you and I clearly hold very different beliefs. I prefer what the Bible states. You prefer a "each to his own beliefs.")

Again, I wrote nothing negative about Charles Stanley. I just don't tolerate misinformation about anyone. Correcting erroneous claims about Stanley having an earned Ph.D. and standing within the theological academy is not unkind. It is simply the truth. Real Christ-followers should care about truth.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

To Science-forum:

It is clear that you don't like Billy Graham, perhaps it's because of what he said about Scholars?

"Sincere Bible scholars, in fact, disagree about the meaning of some of the symbolic passages."

I liked what Billy Graham said from his website:

But God also revealed Himself to us in an even greater way: by coming to earth and becoming a man. That man was Jesus Christ—God revealed in human flesh, “the image of the invisible God” (Colossians 1:15). Jesus was fully man but also fully God. He walked this earth and spent time with all kinds of people—from kings and hated government officials to prostitutes and lepers, the lowest of society.

The link below is where people can post questions and get answers:

https://billygraham.org/answer/im-confused-by-the-bibles-book-of-revelation-what-does-it-mean/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hM98oFIrwQA - Homesick sung by MercyMe with lyrics

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

To Science-forum:

I FOUND IT. This Scripture is NOT an idiom:

The Ascension
Acts 1:6-11

So when they (apostles) came together, they asked Him, “Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?”

Jesus replied, “It is not for you to know times or seasons that the Father has fixed by His own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you, and you will be My witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”

After He (Jesus) had said this, they (apostles) watched as He (Jesus) was taken up, and a cloud hid Him (Jesus) from their sight. They (apostles) were looking intently into the sky as He (Jesus) was going, when suddenly two men dressed in white stood beside them. “Men of Galilee,” they said, “Why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen Him go into heaven.”

Bible Reference: http://biblehub.com/bsb/acts/1.htm Book of Acts, Chapter 1, Verses 6-11 - New International Version (NIV)

Note: "the same way you have seen Him (Jesus) go into Heaven" is the same way He'll (Jesus) come back.
Acts 1:11

"Look, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to each person according to what they have done." Revelation 22:12 (NIV)

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

JeliColt, you said:

"Rest on the Sabbath is absolute no exceptions, so when Jesus heals on the Sabbath he commits a crime against God."

In order for Jesus to die on the Cross, He had to be PERFECT and FREE of sin. Besides, Jesus is the Lord of the Sabbath.

What does it mean that Jesus is the Lord of the Sabbath?

http://www.gotquestions.org/Lord-of-the-Sabbath.html - explains

"For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me."John 6:38

This is why it is good for everyone to have a Teacher. Like a Pastor, that leads his flock. Then once a person has been saved/born again, he has a good learning foundation: no one can shake him or her in believing a lie because the Holy Spirit guides and protects God's holy chosen ones. God chose His chosen ones, even before the world was created. Ephesians 1:4

Your bible teacher, should be a godly man, someone you see quite often, how he lives. You can usually tell a godly man because he always using scriptures to back it up. He doesn't twist the scriptures around to suit himself, leaving room for sin. Matthew 24:11

Good Churches:
First Baptist Church
First Southern Baptist Church
Church of Christ

It is good to attend one of their bible study classes, too. An excellent way to make friends.

You said: " to point out the shortcomings" I point out my shortcomings, too. We all fall short of God's grace (undeserved blessings). There is nothing wrong with pointing out someone's false, to help others learn. We all were wicked at one time. Some Christians haven't transformed (imitating Jesus behavior) to a new self. Ephesians 4:22-24

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbe7OruLk8I - Amazing Grace (My Chains are Gone) - Chris Tomlin (with lyrics)

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness...2 Timothy 3:16

Joyful are people of integrity, who follow the instructions of the LORD. Joyful are those who obey his laws and search for him with all their hearts. Psalm 119:1-2

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

To JediColt:

so when Jesus heals on the Sabbath he commits a crime against God.

You didn't use a question mark at the end of this sentence so I was assuming you meant that Jesus sinned when He healed on the Sabbath.... I was sent this scripture today to answer your statement:

....He never sinned, but he died for sinners to bring you safely home to God...1 Peter 3:18

You see Jesus never sinned.

I get the whole idiom thing. I don't know a whole lot of fancy words (idioms) but I get what God is saying (I'm blessed with the Holy Spirit and every night, I pray. God explains certain things to me, like the book of Revelation, I didn't understand that book/chapters for years but I prayed about it and God revealed it to me. In school, I wasn't good in English class(I got a B-or C's), I was good in Math (A or B's) and I enjoyed playing volleyball in PE.

What denomination are you affiliated with? Catholic? I read on the internet that 66% of the mass majority of people in United States are Catholics. I think it's because it's the easiest religion/Church.

Reference: http://nlt.to/1+Peter+3

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbe7OruLk8I - Amazing Grace (my chains are gone) a favorite song of mine.

[–] baxterrocky 8 years ago

My adivce - we only get one shot at life - enjoy it and do right by the poeple you interact with.

We are incredibly lucky to live in an age where we understand so much about the universe we inhabit. Always try to learn more and be in awe of how AMAZING the universe is. The wealth of human knowledge is at your fingertips.

As for believing in God or follwoing ANY religion. Think critically and objectively about what you beleive and more importantly WHY you beleive it.
Do you have a good reason????????????????????????????

Mr Annnderson.....!

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

To baxterrocky:

Do you have a good reason????????????????????????????

ABSOLUTELY, many...

http://theblazingcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Religion.jpeg -its not about religion-

1 John 3:8

[–] baxterrocky 8 years ago

Yes but do you have a good reason to believe this "Relationship with God" isn't a delusion.

What tangible facts suppoort this realtionship even exists?

Mr Annnderson.....!

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

Believing in God or having faith in God, is a choice. Over my lifetime in 56 years, I have seen God at work (miracles) in my life. Many people will say "there is a reasonable explanation for those works but I choose to believe that God is at work in my life.

Delusions are false beliefs: like a man and woman who are married but the husband believes he's divorced because he is mentally ill and is delusional. I am of sound mind, like million upon millions of others who believe in God.

One fact that changed my life, once I accepted God/Jesus:

I went from poor, a very bad marriage, alcoholic for years (wanted to quit but couldn't) and addicted to smoking,
TO:
Living a life where all my needs are met, lavished with grace, everything we got, we got from God. I married another man that shares my beliefs in God. God has blessed us both with a new house, new car, got cleared from all our debts - more than once, and currently, we have two God-believing sons. There were dangerous events where we should have been hit on the freeway because an Indiana driver got in the same lane with us but God prevented the collision. I believe, unexplained protection is from God. Luck? I believe human beings made up the term "luck" instead of giving all the credit to God.

Important Point: I am NOT trying to convince you, nor am I, trying to change your mind to believe in God, if you don't want to believe that is your choice. I only know that when I tried living my way - my life was a total mess. I was so miserable (I cried a lot) but when I surrendered and said "okay God, I give up, please forgive me for my past sins and I promise to do as you say (according to Jesus teachings in the NT)" and since then, my life has taken a 180 degree turn, for the good! Praise God! Thank you Jesus!

Who in their right mind, would ever want to go back to a life of misery? I mean, my life isn't perfect because we live in a world where Satan prowls around: tempts, influences people's mind, sets traps for you, etc. However, I believe that Jesus will take me home, someday, and there won't be any more pain or suffering, only joy and being with all my love ones that made it there, too. We all get a brand new body and live forever and ever. This is the good news (gospel) that all Christians should be telling non-believers, so we can share our hope with others. Who wouldn't want to live in a beautiful Paradise and be happy forever? Especially for the old people, we know our day will come sooner than most. You could say I am wrong but what if I am right? God knows that we will stumble sometimes but He doesn't want us to fall away from Him. Jesus was tempted 40 days in the wilderness by Satan, so God knows it's difficult for all of us. I am grateful that He never gave up on me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k45iSliZN-E - Never Give Up On Me- Josh Bates

Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see.. Hebrews 11:1

Romans 12:3
1 John 3:8

[–] baxterrocky 8 years ago

Thank you for your response.

I'm happy to hear you have turned your life around.

However, from your resposne you appear to just be saying that things have improved in your life and you "choose" to attribute these positive changes to God.

Just curious as to how you made that connection?

Persionally I think it's much more likely that you affected these positive changes in your life yourself - and you should take credit for that!

However, even if we were to make the extraordinary leap that - yes, there IS a God AND he personally took an interest in your circumstances AND chose to improve them. How do you conclude that it is the Christian God who is doing this?

There are thousands of Gods referenced throughout human history, what is it that singles the Christian God out as the one who is intervening in your life?

Mr Annnderson.....!

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

you affected these positive changes in your life yourself

I told you that I tried on my own to quit drinking for several years (5 or 10 years) but I could not stop. I started reading my bible (New Testament) and after reading daily for 3 months, I stop and thought to myself: I am not drinking anymore, nor do I want to drink. I did not do it on my own. I surrendered to God and he released me from my chains of addictions.

I started working again in 2001 for temporary agencies and continued to work for them until I realized I wasn't going anywhere. By 2003-2004 I spoke with a co-worker, name Bill (Christian of the same beliefs I have now) and I told him how miserable I was and that I couldn't find a permanent job. He told me his story and what God did for him. He added that if I would just start reading my bible, just a few sentences, a few paragraphs that it would help me. He was right!

THE ONE TRUE GOD https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJtPKRMmttU -read these lyrics, the words explains it better than I could-

I told you that you wouldn't believe me. That you would somehow give the credit to something or someone other than God. Your statements are confirming that you do not want to accept that God did all these miracles for me/us. Tonight there was a scorpion in our home. God showed up and whispered to my 23-year son's mind to look down and he did, seeing the scorpion and smashing it with a shoe.

If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, leave that home or town and shake the dust off your feet." Matthew 10:14

No matter what I say, you are not gonna listen so let's agree to disagree, shall we? Bye, bye...

1 John 3:8

[–] baxterrocky 8 years ago

You are correct - I do not "want" to accept God into my life becasue I see absolutely no reason to believe he exists.

If someone can present me with a good reason or evidence, I will consider it on its own merits.

However you have not been able to do this. You merely assert that you started reading the bible and within a few months your life imporved. This in no way demonstrates God was responsible for the improvement in your situation.

If my life is going really badly, and I decide to read Lord of the Rings, then it improves, does that mean elves or wizards are responsible??

When people are at their lowest, that is a prime opportunity for the religious to peddle hope to them in the guise of salvation. These sorts of assurances and promises that God is the answer can certainly compell a desperate individual to take solace in reading the bible (reinforced by the pontificating of other believers around them). This combination of factors can definitely alter an individual's perspective and give them a sense of acceptance and belonging.

Then if things do eventually improve for them it's easy to attribute their change in circumstances to thier new found beliefs.

Also - your scorpion story proves nothing either. If you already are a believer in God, it is very easy to attribute any feeling or thought to him. We all have instincts & an inner monologue... When these kick in, especially in a potentially dangerous situation (ie: the scorpion), it is easy for the religious to ascribe their own internal dialogue to their deity.

Hence why many religious people often speak of their "personal relationship" with God. It is something specific to them, that cannot be verified by anyone else. Voices in their head/ feelings. Which is just YOUR voice, YOUR feelings. No external intervention going on here.

That's why I keep coming back to - do you have a GOOD reason to believe what you believe??

Someone telling you to read the bible or "voices" in your head do not constitute good reasons. Especailly for something that fundamentally alters your understanding of the entire universe you inhabbit. I would need something incontrovertible to make that leap.

Mr Annnderson.....!

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

To Science-forum:

There is NO requirement in the Bible that says you must know Greek or Hebrew, being saved is a gift from God. God looks deeper within us because He loves His children. Pastors, at all my previous Churches, were kind, gentle, encouraging and very understanding, as all Ministers and or Pastors should be.

God says:

Anyone who hates a brother or sister is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life residing in him. 1 John 3:15

Consequently,

Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; in all your ways submit to Him, and He will make your paths straight. Proverbs 3:6

Galatians 6:1
Matthew 5:39

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

Why don't you just say PHRASE because that is what an idiom is.

No. You are incorrect. Only a small percentage of "phrases" are idioms. I suggest you look it up and discover what the word "idiom" means.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

To Science-forum:

id·i·om
noun

1. a group of words established by usage as having a meaning not deducible from those of the individual words (e.g., rain cats and dogs, see the light).

synonyms: language, mode of expression, turn of phrase, style, speech, locution, diction, usage, phraseology, phrasing, phrase, vocabulary, terminology, parlance, jargon, argot, cant, patter, tongue, vernacular; informal lingo, "these musicians all work in the gospel idiom"[/quote]

[–] archer1812 9 years ago

Seriously? This isn't a triviality. An idiom or idiomatic phrase is not just a phrase. How do you not understand this simple concept? They teach that stuff in Catholic Schools, you know.

Look, if I say "it's a piece of cake", then you understand that I mean that something is easy.

But if someone from a different culture who has no knowledge of the English language or North American culture, were to read this translated in their native languge, they wouldn't have a clue that it meant something more than its literal meaning of just a slice of pastry. They would be clueless. That's what he meant when he said that you cannot understand the Bible, or at least many of its passages, if you don't understand the context and meaning of those idioms and instead you take them literally.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

To Archer1812:

God's Words are NOT Trivial?

That is why I post God's scriptures, a lot. Then you call me a "parrot" because I posted God's scriptures. Either you care about God's words in His scriptures or you don't. You can't have it both ways.

Lack of understanding the Bible's meanings.

First of all, I read what you posted to Science-forum and you said you don't attend Church, therefore, not even a Priest is teaching you to change your harmful ways, towards others. Secondly, when I posted scriptures, to show you your error in ways: you get very angry and call me ugly names because you don't know what else to say. Thirdly, if you are NOT going to live by Jesus' teachings: don't preach to others because that is practicing hypocrisy. Make a decision and stick to it. Either, to follow Jesus' teachings or be a lawlessman.

The Man of Lawlessness
The coming of the lawless one will be accompanied by the working of Satan, with every kind of power, sign, and false wonder, and with every wicked deception directed against those who are perishing, because they refused the love of the truth that would have saved them. For this reason, God will send them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie, in order that judgment will come upon all who have disbelieved the truth and delighted in wickedness. 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12

"Do NOT merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says." James 1:22

http://www.bible.ca/cath-bible-attitude-towards.htm

[–] archer1812 9 years ago

You don't seem to be aware. In fact, it's obvious that you to still lack understanding of the concept and its import in this subject.

I did read that you switch denominations. As I said in my other post, you've mentioned it several times. BTW, good on you for finally admitting that Catholicism is a denomination of Christianity ;)

The reason I mentioned Catholic school here was as a bit of dig at you for your claim that you attended a one. See, Catholic Schools are well known for their high standards and well-rounded education. It had nothing to do with 'practicing Catholic traditions', but simply for general knowledge. So is surprising to me that someone who attended one would believe that an idiom is just "a fancy word meaning expression or phrase". I mean, this is basic stuff. BTW, I attended a Catholic School (Jesuit) in South America until first semester of 7th grade before we moved. I wish I could've continued, not for the religious aspect, but because for its top-notch education.

the pope told the Priests to tell their Church members "Not to read the Bible."

Citation needed. Else you're just spreading false rumors.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

To Archer1812/Pastrami:

Here is your PROOF that says the Pope/Catholic Church, are telling their Catholic members to stop reading their bibles:

http://www.bible.ca/cath-bible-attitude-towards.htm - website

Now do the right thing and admit that you were wrong by telling me that I was spreading these false rumors. Actually, you should say: you're sorry but if you can't, that is okay. Some of us find it very difficult to say those two little words.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iq6eHg6X5pw - Lead Us Back -

[–] archer1812 9 years ago

As far as the other citation needed: I am only telling you what my brother-in-law told me.

So you are spreading false rumors

You expect me to remember way back then. SERIOUSLY?

I expect you to know something as basic as what an idiom is.

No, I am NOT admitting that the Catholics are a part of Christianity,

And here I thought that you were making progress. Alas, you're just as deluded as before... BTW, you keep avoiding the question of whether or not you consider Orthodox Christians (Greeks, Eastern etc) and Anglicans to be Christian.

If you read the difference between Catholic and Christian

This is phrased incorrectly. Phrase it properly then I might continue the discussion.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

Pastrami:

I remember, in 2005-2006, an Asian acquaintance of mine (the mother of one of my son's friends from a public school in Benicia, California), told me that the Catholic Church Priest told her (her husband's Church) NOT to read the bible. She did anyway, good for her.

On the day of Judgment Day, everyone will have to answer to Jesus, for every evil word they have said.

This is phrased incorrectly. Phrase it properly then I might continue the discussion.

I did not title the web doc.

A person doesn't have to be a scholar or college student to read the Bible:

If any of you lacks wisdom, you should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to you. James 1:5

I do encourage everyone who reads the bible to have an exhorter, when it comes to reading the bible. This is someone who you see how he lives (living according to the standards of God). He must be a godly man (for a man) or a godly woman (for a woman), and follows the teachings of Jesus, then I would say he or she is a good candidate, for an exhorter.

http://faithmix.com/files/series_notes/spiritual_gifts/sp_notes01_exhorter.htm

[–] archer1812 9 years ago

Yes. You are. The Pope has never said that. In fact, quite the opposite:

POPE FRANCIS:
"Taking care of the family is a way to work on the Lord's vineyard so it can produce the fruit of the Kingdom of God”.

In order for families to move forward, Pope Francis recommended that they read the Word of God. Pauline Publishing gave a Bible to every person at the square to commemorate their founding. Pope Francis called on families to use them.

POPE FRANCIS:
"It is not for putting in a shelf, but rather for having it at hand. It is for reading it often, every day, either individually or in groups, husband and wife, parents and children; maybe at night, especially on Sundays. That way, the family can move forward with the light and the power of the Word of God!”

See? YOU ARE A LIAR

And you have the gall to accuse me of breaking commandments? I seem to recall something about that. Maybe Matthew 7:5 or Luke 6:41

Look, there was time, particularly in the early 20th century, where in some Catholic circles people were discouraged from reading the Bible on their own, without any guidance. This was to avoid misinterpretation. But it was not a Papal command or anything like that. Yet Catholics did and do hear and read Scripture in Mass. There it is discussed and analyzed. So when you claim that Catholics don't read or know the Bible, or that the Pope told people not to, YOU ARE LYING.

Anyway, besides Pope Francis encouraging people to read the Bible, other Popes have done the same. In 1893 Pope Leo XIII published a letter encouraging Bible study. Pius XII in 1943 also encouraged the faithful to "study and love the Bible".
The second Vatican Council in the 1960s encouraged all the clergy and people to study the Bible faithfully.

So yes, you were lying and spreading false rumors.

Since I don't want to continue the discussion with you, I will NOT rephrase.

You won't rephrase it because you know that deep down you are full of crap. Simple as that.

Some of you make it sound like you have to be a scholar or college student to read the Bible :-)

No, you don't. But you have to understand the context. And as bible-and-science-forum pointed out, you have to know how to understand idioms within certain passages so that you won't misinterpret the passage. Or else you'll get dummies believing in idiotic concepts like a pre-tribulation rapture of being zapped into the sky. 

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

To Archer1812:

I did produce a reference but you did NOT bother to read it. It is NOT my fault that you refused to read it. I found it in the below link:

Reference: http://www.enkivillage.com/the-difference-between-catholic-and-christian.html - the below quote is from the link:

However, the beliefs of Catholics and Christians start to differ on other matters and have divided into many different denominations, with Catholicism being just one, though the largest one.

There are many who do not realize that the Roman Catholic Church is just one denomination...The bible used by Catholics and Protestants is the same, but the interpretation differs...

Where is the current position of the Pope's position of reading the bible?

Stop calling me a liar, it wasn't me who said the Pope ordered all Priests to tell their congregations to stop reading their bibles. I was merely saying what I heard from my brother-in-law, who is a Christian, who also switched from Catholic denomination to Christian denomination.

A Christian fears God and complies with God's commandments. For instance, I have refrained from calling you names because God commands me to.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding. Proverbs 9:10

Jesus said "the one without sin, cast the first stone on her." No one cast a stone because they all knew that they had sinned.

I was NOT judging you, just simply pointing out what Exodus 20:4 says, for your wisdom, after that, you decide what to do. Constantly calling me a liar, is judging me, which is NOT your place but God's job. Rule of thumb: when a phrase starts out "you are" it is a telltale sign and if you call yourself a Christian, then you need to restrain yourself from non-Christian behavior.

[–] archer1812 8 years ago

I notice all examples of the Pope saying to read their bibles are from 50 years ago. Where is the current position of the Pope's position of reading the bible? Can you produce proof that the current Pope (2016) encourages the Catholic members to read their bibles?

AGAIN:

POPE FRANCIS:
"It is not for putting in a shelf, but rather for having it at hand. It is for reading it often, every day, either individually or in groups, husband and wife, parents and children; maybe at night, especially on Sundays. That way, the family can move forward with the light and the power of the Word of God!”

Are you really that ignorant and dumb that you don't know that POPE FRANCIS IS THE CURRENT POPE!?

In my heart, I know that Catholics aren't nothing like Christians because Christians have love (understanding, compassion, sympathy, humility, etc) most Catholics that I have been around (like you), show no kindness, no gentleness, no understanding,


Oh, the irony . You really think very highly of yourself. Sorry sweetie, but you're none of those things that you claim real Christians are. And neither are a lot of them.

As for me not showing "kindness, gentleness or understanding".. You forget that you were the one who attacked me first when I said that only a small minority of Christians believed in "the rapture". And you were the one insulting Catholics. You were the one "baring false witness". And now you claim to be the righteous victim? And you wonder why people, including me, respond to you in kind? You reap what you sow, baby.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

To Pastrami/Archer:

You don't have to worry about it now, because I read in one of your posts to Science-forum that you don't attend a Catholic Church. Exodus 20:4 Most Catholics are inactive, meaning they don't attend Church on a regular basis or read their bibles which means they don't follow Jesus teachings in the NT. Woe to those poor souls.

I am one of God's chosen ones. I am NOT trying to win man's approval. I want to please God because He takes care of me. Thank you Jesus!

btw: We haven't watch regular or cable tv since 2007, we are careful what we watch on our big screen HD television. Thank you Jesus, for all His many blessings!

[–] archer1812 8 years ago

Why should I care who the current Pope is? You got me mix up with someone that cares.

Seriously? SMH. This is why:

-Because as the head of the largest Christian denomination, and a head of state, he is a very influential person. Not just in religion, but in world matters in general.

-Because is just simple and basic common knowledge, FFS. He's on the news pretty much every week. Not knowing who he is demonstrates a tremendous lack of knowledge of the world around you. Your lack of curiosity is dumbfounding. Clearly you keep your head buried in the sand. Or in the Bible. For all the good it does you since you don't even understand what you read.

- And for the relevant point to the discussion: Because YOU brought him up first. You said that the Pope told people not to read the Bible. So if you're going to make ridiculous and demonstrably false accusations about the man, at least you should who you're talking about. And at the very least know his freaking name

Oh no, you attack me first: by insulting me and calling me names.

You're ridiculous. And you are a LIAR. You first quoted my post where I answered the OP's question about the rapture. That's where you started to call me ignorant for saying that the rapture was not a doctrine accepted by the majority of Christians. Conveniently you deleted that post. As you have deleted or edited most of the posts that make you look like a complete a§.

not only do Catholic Churches have a Jesus image on their Cross but they have statues of saints and the virgin Mary (Jesus mother) in their Catholic Churches.

And this is a revelation to you? LOL Again, it's called a Crucifix. And yes, they have statues. So what? What's your point?

Make NOT any images of anything in Heaven. Exodus 20:4

And as usual, you keep demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of scripture. You do not understand the concept of context, among many other things, like idioms, as has been discussed previously. That's why you believe in the complete sh*t that is "the rapture". I wouldn't be surprised if you were a member fo the "rapture ready" forum. I've seen it a couple of times. It's hilarious, comedy gold. All these deluded, desperate fundies waiting and hoping and praying to be whisked away into the air, and anticipating with glee at the prospect of all the "bad" people that will get left behind 

Look, again, you claimed to have been raised a Catholic. Yet you keep showing a complete ignorance for the most basic tenets and doctrines and traditions. You know nothing of sacred art and its history. If you were ever a Catholic then YOU SHOULD KNOW THIS. But I suspect that you are also lying when you claimed to have been a Catholic, as you've lied elsewhere.

In any case, since you're an ignorant fundie who knows nothing I'll give you the short answer:

God did not prohibit statues; he prohibited the worship of them.
And as much as you ignorant fundies like to accuse, Catholics do not worship statues.

Besides, elsewhere in the Bible God either commands or permits the making of statues. For example, in Ex. 25:18–20, God commands the construction of two gold Angel statues.

You don't have to worry about it now, because you probably don't even attend a Catholic Church, like most typical Catholics -are non-active.

What business is it of yours whether or not I attend Church? Worry about yourself. Besides, whether or not I'm a practicing Catholic is irrelevant. All my arguments stand on their own.

God thinks I am a beautiful child. I don't care what you think of me because I am NOT trying to win your acceptance or anyone else's approval. I only want to please God because He does for me. What can you do for me? Throw insults at me? I don't NEED that from anyone so find yourself another punching bag and leave me alone.

And a very humble one, I'm sure. Actually, I have it on good authority that God thinks that you're an idiot. A well-intentioned one, but still an idiot. He shakes His head when he sees you being bogged down in legalisms and can't see the forest for the trees. And when you attack other Christians. And He actually rolled his eyes when you used to call yourself "A chosen one".

As for what I'm doing, well in the beginning I was trying to point out your misconceptions (about the rapture, the Catholic church and other Christians in general), your bigotry and right out ignorance. I (and that other guy) did it with facts and reason. We wanted to see if you would open your eyes and see how deluded and sheltered you were. But since you proved to be immune to facts and rational discourse, you just double-down on your crap: telling lies, spouting non-stop Bible verses out of context. etc. So I simply continued to respond to see just how much idiocy you can spout, and how long can you keep it up. You know, just for sport

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

To Pastrami/Archer:

I NEVER called you ignorant.

JESUS SAID "But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you. Matthew 5:44

I stopped watching regular/cable tv in 2007. Besides, I am not missing anything. We rent movies from Ntflx and they are filtered from a Clearplay dvd player so we don't have to see all that junk that tv is showing these days.

But the wicked will perish: Though the LORD's enemies are like the flowers of the field, they will be consumed, they will go up in smoke. Psalm 37:20

Wicked definition: intended to or capable of harming someone...extremely unpleasant.

Did you know that God doesn't want us to quarrel (2 Timothy 2:23) but to be imitators of God? Ephesians 5:1 Did Jesus fight the guys who beat him? No, he did not. He just took it.

Warn a divisive person once, and then warn them a second time. After that, have nothing to do with them. Titus 3:10

Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," says the Lord. Romans 12:19

I will continue to pray for you...you are in God's hands, now.

[–] archer1812 9 years ago

Funny how you changed several of your posts to, I don't know, make you look less nutty, save face. The interesting thing is that you were called out as a liar and spreading falsehoods but you just keep pretending to be this good little Christian.

[–] archer1812 9 years ago

I NEVER said the words in the bible were trivial

I never said that you did. I know that you were saying that making a distiction between words like idioms, phrases, expressions, is trivial. But it isn't, you couldn't be more wrong.

This this what you're basically saying, what your argument boils down to:

If in the Bible it was written that God told Noah that He was going to make it rain cats and dogs for 40 days and 40 nights and cover the whole Earth, that you would accept it literally and wouldn't interpret the phrase "rain cats and dogs" as an idiom. You would literally believe that small canines and felines fell from the sky nonstop for over a month. Because as you put it in another post, "God doesn't lie"

This is what you are arguing. And this is why understanding the difference between those words is anything but trivial.

You remind me of a young and foolish pastor that I saw in an HBO documentary called "Questioning Darwin". In it he said that if somewhere in the Bible it was written that 2+2=5, then he would believe it and accepted as the truth. And no explaniation or amount of evidence that proves it wrong would make him believe otherwise.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

The sermon on Sunday (June 26, 2016) at First Southern Baptist Church was about Patience. The Pastor said that when we don't show patience towards others, we are disciplined by God. The lack of patience is among all who do not have love. "Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love." 1 John 4:8

One's pride will bring him low, but he who is lowly in spirit will obtain honor. Proverbs 29:23

Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.
Matthew 23:12

But He (God) gives us more grace. That is why Scripture says: "God opposes the proud but shows favor to the humble." James 4:6-10

The Spirit of the LORD will rest on him-- the Spirit of wisdom and of understanding, the Spirit of counsel and of might, the Spirit of the knowledge and fear of the LORD--Isaiah 11:2

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] archer1812 9 years ago

. I decided to change as many posts as I can today because I admit that I did lose patience and I prefer God not to discipline me, for it later. Though I confess that I lose my patience because most posts are soooo negative and discouraging.

Those so-called "negative" posts were responses to your posts of condescention, arragance, and lies. And how convient to just say God will "discipline" you later, instead of owning up to those things. You know, like an adult instead of hidding behind your religion.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

To Pastrami:

condescention, arragance,

Please use the spell checker because I had a tough time figuring out what you were trying to say.

I think what you were trying to spell was:
Condemnation and Arrogance
There is NO

Condemnation

in a reborn Christian/saved person, therefore, ONLY conviction - every Christian knows that.
and

Arrogance

(someone who thinks they are right all the time). I can humble myself and admit that I am NOT right all the time. A arrogant person would NOT admit his wrong. You are getting me mix up with someone else (initials S-A_B_F).

There is no good reason for me to try to explain to you about God's words because you won't even try to understand. You told me that I am excessive when it comes to God (the term you used was frantic). Most people that persecute others are solely persecuting Jesus. Every Christian knows that.

God is just: He will pay back trouble to those who trouble you. 2 Thessalonians 1:6

so stop bringing trouble.

[–] archer1812 8 years ago

You sure woke up today with a bad case of verbal diarrhea. All of sudden you decide to respond to 6 of my posts? LOL

condescention, arragance

Please use the spell checker because I had a tough time figuring out what you were trying to say.

I think what you were trying to spell was:

Condemnation and Arrogance

There is NO

Ooh, I made two typos for typing too fast. Thanks for the advise. Though you definitely should follow it yourself. Some of the stuff you write. Poor spelling and terrible syntax. English is not my first language so I'm bound to make mistakes. What's your excuse?

BTW, it's condescension, a mistake of only one letter, yet phonetically the same. And you still couldn't figure it out? What a dummy.

And yes, both terms describe your attitude to a tee.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

To Pastrami:

EDIT:
Calling folks ugly names, isn't right: in our present Society, Christian rules or according to the Catholic Church - you don't attend anymore.

..for receiving instruction in prudent behavior, doing what is right and just and fair; giving prudence to those who are simple, knowledge and discretion to the young-- the wise listen and add to their learning, and let the discerning get guidance--...Proverbs 1:3

Jesus said "you should love your enemy" - A teaching that Catholics/Christians teach.

Pastrami: I began reading and studying the scriptures (with help from FBC Pastors' sermons/teachings) since 2003. I must have learned over a thousand scriptures, on a wide range of subjects (dealing with everything you can think of). If a person proves to me, using scriptures, then, I will ask God in prayer, to help me understand and He does, God is awesome. If a person doesn't use scriptures to prove to me what God says: I will DISREGARD EVERYTHING HE SAYS.

http://biblehub.com/nasb/proverbs/1.htm

[–] archer1812 8 years ago

Citation needed. Else you're just spreading false rumors.

Pastrami since you and Science-forum are buddies, I will tell you what he told me:

"You expect for me to do your research...."

Sorry silly, that's not how it works.

YOU made the claim. You failed to provide any evidence to support that claim.

I, however, provided evidence that the opposite was true.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4824308/board/nest/255637926?p=2&d=258684829#258684829

You were already proven to be nothing but a liar who was spreading false rumors...bearing false witness... Yet here you again with this crap post? Drop the arrogance. Have a little shame and dignity and just admit that you were in the wrong instead of doubling down. What kind of Christian are you?

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

So you are saying that---because you lack basic reading comprehension skills---looking up the word "idiom" still didn't help you to understand why it is MUCH MORE than simply "a phrase."

Of course, the fact that you consider the words "trivial" explains a lot. The Book of Proverbs explains why you scorn such instruction.;

We obviously have different beliefs.

Agreed. I care about distinguishing exactly what the Biblical texts (which were written in Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic, by the way) ACTUALLY STATE while it sounds like you prefer various manmade traditions. I don't look down on you for that. Most Christ-followers (myself included) find ourselves having to go through that growth process at some point in our lives---especially if we have been involved in Bible translation on the field and have been forced to see how the past five hundred years of translation TRADITIONS have so often skewed our understanding of God's truths. Indeed, several Young Earth Creationist beliefs which have taken YECs into tradition-based interpretations so far from the original statements of the Bible are due to their misunderstandings of Hebrew idioms. (Thus, you are not alone in your confusions concerning IDIOMS and the importance of Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek fluency in resolving so many of these issues. Indeed, the purpose of much of my life's work and ministry has been to minimize the confusion of English-Bible readers---as well as those who read the Bible in Fulani, Tagalog, Mandarin, and several other languages you've probably never heard.)

A half century ago, I probably shared many of your hermeneutical presuppositions---and we would certainly have shared similar Dunning-Kruger false perceptions of our theological acumen and spiritual maturity. I certainly hope that you will be able to navigate your way to a better grasp of the scriptures and the ways of Jesus Christ much faster than I did. Tradition as well as hermeneutical inertia and stasis is a difficult taskmaster to overcome. Your generation has a lot of educational resources and advantages through the Internet that mine could scarcely have imagined. But both back then and today, lots of people carefully isolate themselves within their chosen brand of sectarian propaganda and rigorously avoid anything which might expose them to more scriptural exegesis and theological viewpoints. So chronic stagnation is easily maintained. I hope you will be able to avoid my errors along the way in that regard. I was so busy pursuing my ministry objectives and publishing projects that I failed to notice how much I was being strangled and held back by my sectarian traditions. Indeed, I made many of the same kind of mistakes illustrated in A CHOSEN ONE's posts concerning Charles Stanley. I assumed that:

1) Drs. Gish, Morris, and Whitcomb shared my particular brand of born-again fundamentalist tradition and seemed like very godly, prayerful men, so I simply assumed that God would not allow them to err, both in matters of theology and of "creation science." So surely I couldn't go wrong if I trusted their judgments! (Of course, I was very wrong in trusting people who were in no way qualified to declare the entire academy in errors.)

2) It took me many years to realize that their sincerity and genuine piety---however impressive those traits might or might not have been in them---did NOTHING to guarantee their expertise in fields of Biblical Studies, science, philosophy, and history for which they had little or no training or experience. The more I scrutinized their "scholarship" and even their sloppy footnoting, the more I was shocked by their misleading quote-mining. (Whether that result was due to deliberate deception on their part OR simply their overly trusting gullibility in relying upon deceptive sources, the result is the same either way.)

It took me a very long time to figure out these simple truths. As in all things, your mileage may differ.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

TO Science-and-Bible-Forum

Jesus says: "Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." John 8:7

The Great Apostasy

"Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God, in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God." Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way. And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness. 2 Thessalonians 2:3-12

1 John 4:7
2 Peter 2:1

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

Words of God (sample words in the Bible, pretty elementary, so everyone can understand):

Jesus says if you love me, you will obey me. John 14:23

The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding. Proverbs 9:10

"A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. John 13:34

Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you. Ephesians 4:32

"Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother or sister has something against you, your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to them; then come and offer your gift." Matthew 5:24

Whatever you do, work at it with your whole being, for the Lord and not for men, because you know that you will receive an inheritance from the Lord as your reward. It is the Lord Christ you are serving. Whoever does wrong will be repaid for his wrong, and there is no favoritism. Colossians 3:23-25

Proverbs 19:11
2 Thessalonians 1:6
Colossians 3:13

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] CosmopolitanHobo 9 years ago

(Nor does anyone here think that any deities post on these threads.)

Maybe not these actual threads but kurt thinks that God communicates through the digital medium, along with Satan and all dead people on some magical God computer. And I don't think he's joking about that either.

[–] kurt-2000 9 years ago

Maybe not these actual threads but kurt thinks that God communicates through the digital medium, along with Satan and all dead people on some magical God computer. And I don't think he's joking about that either.

?

You'd have to elaborate on that one Cosmo.

[–] CosmopolitanHobo 9 years ago

You'd have to elaborate on that one Cosmo.

Perhaps you could elaborate on that yourself:

Send me a board comment post after you die, confirming there is no Heaven.

And that's far from the first time you've spoken of the dead, or even the divine, posting messages online or sending tweets/emails.

[–] kurt-2000 9 years ago

Perhaps you could elaborate on that yourself:

Translation: Cosmo refuses to elaborate. ok....

And that's far from the first time you've spoken of the dead, or even the divine, posting messages online or sending tweets/emails.

And in your case, you'll be too busy in hell to send a thoughtful apology comment.

[–] CosmopolitanHobo 9 years ago

Translation: Cosmo refuses to elaborate. ok....

Congratulations on not owning up to what you've said and defending your claims, as always.

And in your case, you'll be too busy in hell to send a thoughtful apology comment.

How is a dead person going to send a message of any sort? This is what you need to elaborate on, not me.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

To Science-forum: I see you wrote this on June 22, 2016 - a Wednesday. I have a very busy life so I am just getting around to reading it. I choose to submit to God and flee from the Devil. You would be wise if you decide to flee from the Devil, too.

Submit yourselves, then, to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. James 4:7

No one who lives in Him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen Him or known Him. 1 John 3:6

So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets. Matthew 7:12

Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. 1 John 4:11

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iADBfooeo8A - In Christ Alone / The Solid Rock (lyrics) by Travis Cottrell

No guilt in life, no fear in death,
This is the power of Christ in me;
From life's first cry to final breath.
Jesus commands my destiny.
No power of hell, no scheme of man,
Can ever pluck me from His hand;
Till He returns or calls me home,
Here in the power of Christ I'll stand.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

To Science-Forum:

God gives understanding to those who ask Him. An Associate Pastor from the First Baptist Church of Arkansas told me once that he has different points of view than a brother in Christ from the Church and he says that is okay. Pastor added that we are all going to have different points of view but that is a good thing. I believe, that you like encouragement just like everybody else, can't you start from here on out, to be building up Baptist Christians instead of tearing them down?

Therefore encourage one another and build each other up.... 1 Thessalonians 5:11

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge..... Proverbs 1: 7

If you love Me, you will keep My commandments. And I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Advocate to be with you forever— the Spirit of truth. John 14:15

I believe with all my heart and soul that I have the Spirit of truth, as Jesus says, he has given me an advocate to be with me forever. John 14:16-17 Jesus, my Savior leads me to

the way and the truth and the life. John 14:6

To end the discussion of idioms which is what started this whole mess. I have faith that God/Jesus will take real good care of me. Everything else was just a misunderstanding between us, let's just leave it at that, okay?

And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful. 2 Timothy 2:24

Do to others as you would have them do to you. Luke 6:31

Are you a Biblical scholar? It was not my intent to rob you of your dignity or to harm you. I am sorry that I lost my temper from my previous posts.

A person's wisdom yields patience; it is to one's glory to overlook an offense. Proverbs 19:11

1 John 3:9

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

To Science-forum:

I am going to add my two cents, In my VIEWPOINT, I BELIEVE: you don't NEED to know knowledge of Biblical Hebrew or Biblical Greek, to read the Bible. God gives understanding and wisdom, to all that ask Him. God gives generously, if it is according to His will.

If any of you lacks wisdom, you should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to you. James 1:5

I AM SORRY that you feel that I am saying: your education was a big waste of time, wherever it came from (public books or college) but God does give wisdom through His miracles, just like God gave Solomon wisdom.

According to IMDb terms and conditions: People are free to give their own points of views without discrimination or prejudice from others.

IMDb is supposed to be fun and pleasant, let's keep it that way. :-)

[–] CosmopolitanHobo 9 years ago

God gives understanding and wisdom, to all that ask Him.

What about all those, and there are a bloody lot of them, who ask but don't ever receive any sort of understanding or wisdom? You don't even need to leave this board to find examples. Seems like an argument against to me, good job!👍

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

To CosmopolitanHobo:

you used the term

"against me."

Sincerely, there are things in the bible that are against lots of things that we do. To make it short, we all sin, just in different ways but we should try not to sin and repent for the sins that we committed against God. Its very difficult not to sin but we all should ask God for help because when we are weak, He is strong.

That is why, for Christ’s sake, I delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong. 2 Corinthians 12:7–10

"Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Matthew 11:28

Therefore we do not lose heart. Though outwardly we are wasting away, yet inwardly we are being renewed day by day. 2 Corinthians 4:16

Jesus replied, "Truly I tell you, if you have faith and do not doubt.... If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer." Matthew 21:21-22

I read a chapter in my New Testament bible, daily. I have also been led by Pastors who taught sermons in the Church of Christ in Texas (1990), First Baptist Church of Atlanta (2003), First Baptist Church in the Northern CA(2006), and First Southern Baptist Church in Oklahoma (2015).

Like the words of this song (below):
And we'll understand Him better by and by

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyKU-xY-gYY - links to the song "By and By" sung by Elvis Presley

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

Science-forum said:

It sounds like you have no knowledge

A Chosen_One said:

God said: "As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit--just as it has taught you, remain in him. 1 John 2:27

All I have to do is keep reading Jesus teachings (NT) and through the Holy Spirit: I will be taught because the Holy Spirit comes from God. I don't need to go to any school that you speak of because there has NEVER been a greater teacher than God. I just need to keep praying to God and asking Him for understanding and wisdom. End of story.

Take delight in the LORD, and he will give you the desires of your heart. Psalm 37:4

http://www.godtube.com/watch/?v=WLPKY7NX - Forgiveness- something we all need...

1 John 3:8

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

To Science-Forum,

Science-forum, you said: "...you might be qualified to correct experienced Biblical scholars....

Just because my viewpoint is different than yours, doesn't make me wrong. Of course, I know the difference between idioms and phrases. I have the best teacher in the world, His name is Jesus and through the Holy Spirit that comes from God, I am taught. Do you think you are smarter than God, the Holy Spirit, or Jesus Christ? Is a biblical scholar better than the Father, the son and the Holy Spirit? Or are you perfect, as God is? There are many interpretations of the bible, as you might agree, does that make them all ignorant because their viewpoints are different than yours? No, they are NOT ignorant. Many denominations and non-denominations, chose to believe what they believe and that is their God-given right. Yes, I been out there in the world and I spoken to different denominations and attended their Churches. Was I insultive to them? No. I told them what I believed and they didn't call me names but showed me respect. Why can't you let other believers believe the way they want? Why do you need for them to agree with you? You obviously, have your own beliefs, and to you: you have the right beliefs and everyone else is wrong, right? Isn't it possible that you could be wrong? Live and let Live, let people make their own minds up. If they don't choose your way, then leave them alone. Don't be insultive or hateful because Christians are to be imitators of God.

Imitate God, therefore, in everything you do, because you are his dear children. Ephesians 5:1

Have you been imitating God? Have you shown honor, respect, compassion, kindness, gentleness?

If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 1 Corinthians 13:1

God would NOT want to discourage us but to encourage us, so why can't you be an imitator of God? Ephesians 5:1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tu258qXd4js - His Love Knows No End - Beautiful!

https://bible.org/seriespage/5-god-s-call-christlikeness - Good point made -
https://gotquestions.org/Christ-like.html (I like this answer)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6MzgVsP2uE - Christ is Enough -

[–] archer1812 9 years ago

That's exactly right. Only a small minority of Christians believe in the rapture.
It is based on misinterpretation. And is also a fairly new invention. It dates back to the 19th century, and only becoming popular among certain sects during the 20th century... Which means that for over 1800 years Christianity got along just fine without that belief.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] archer1812 9 years ago

So two months later you decide that you want to start this discussion all over again? Why? What's the point? We've already established that you don't know what the heck you're talking about and that you're an ignorant fanatic. I don't say this as a throw-away insult. It is not. I say it as a statement of fact. While ignorance can be remedied, I fear that your fanaticism won't allow it. And that's a sad thing.

Yes, I know that you were raised Catholic before you converted to the Baptist faith* as an adult. You've brought it up several times before. And as I said before, it doesn't surprise me that now you're such a fanatic, because as the saying goes: There is no zealot like a convert. It does surprise me that you claim to have attended Catholic School since the educational standards at those schools tend to be very high, and so far you haven't displayed any of that Catholic education. Particularly when it comes to the use of logic, something that Jesuits excel at.

You are simply wrong. You are so wrong is pathetic. The ignorance and arrogance displayed by you and your assertions of who is and who isn't a Christian is almost comical. Your lack of self-awareness is outstanding. But was even more pathetic is that you cloak yourself in a shroud of fake righteousness. It wouldn't surprise me if you take this post as an attack on your faith.

*You do realize that your sect, a fairly new one, was seen as heretical since its inception. That you were not of the true faith, therefore you are not Christian. Good thing that in this day and age most Christians including Catholics are past that sort of thing.

BTW, you never answered whether or not you consider Orthodox Christians (Greek, Eastern)or Anglicans to be Christian. And why or why not.
.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

Pastrami, you said "do you consider Orthodox Christians (Greeks, Eastern etc) and Anglicans to be Christian?"

An answer: http://www.religionfacts.com/christianity/branches (according to this article, they are all Christians) yes, I agree with the article and they (above) all (most likely) have their own beliefs, too.

It is very important to read the bible, everyday, for God's instructions for His plan for each one of us.
http://biblehub.com/matthew/1-18.htm -A link to a online Bible - A Plain Day to Day English Version

Love comes from God because God is Love. 1 John 4:7

As Baptist believers, you will understand by and by. It is a working process for one that accepts Jesus's teachings but leading to a joyful and a fulfilling life.

I would highly recommend a Church of Christ, Southern Baptist Church, First Baptist Church or a First Southern Baptist Church in your area (search with google), so that you can learn, all about God and Jesus. It's a totally different experience, one you will never forget.

If a believer of God, is gonna kneel, kneel by your bed and talk to God, in prayer.

What I LOVE about First Southern Baptist or First Baptist Church: EVERYONE IS FRIENDLY, a chance to make new friends and these Churches usually has some type of social gatherings after Church service on Sundays. My son's youth group (50), people in their twenties, have social gatherings: cookouts, go to the movies, go bowling, go on field trips, go to concerts and play sports and board games. They have a lot of clean fun.

When I went to Catholic Churches in California and Texas: no one is friendly, and fact, No one spoke to me, so NO chance to make new friends. No one visited me from the Catholic Church. No youth activities for the college students. During Catholic services (Mass), there is a lot of motion for Church members: kneeling and standing.

The image of Jesus on all Catholic Churches Crosses goes against what God says in the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20), that is why I dropped out of a Catholic Church, when I became an adult.

1 Corinthians 14:33
1 John 4:7
James 4:4

http://www.klove.com/ - Search for a Radio Station Near You

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

many denominations including a minority of Protestants use the Crucifix, not just Catholics

I NEVER said it was wrong to use the Cross in Churches...

doctrinal and general knowledge

My knowledge is in Scripture. You have NO knowledge of Scripture, just your own talk.

You should know this, IF you were raised Catholic, as you claim.

Catholics do NOT teach the bible book in religion class. You should know this. Oh that is right, you went to Catholic school in South Africa, NOT here in the United States. Catholic Schools in the U.S. teach from books (with stories) that they buy for their religion classes. I went to St. Anthony's Elementary in Oakland, CA from the time I was 5 years old (first grade) to the 4th grade, then I attended public schools for two years, then I attended St. Elizabeth's Elementary in the 7th and 8th grade. Back then, the Catholics Schools did NOT teach out of the bible, then HOW WAS I SUPPOSED TO KNOW ABOUT EXODUS 20:4?

Boy you don't know a whole lot, ITS YOU WHO DISPLAY "I DON'T KNOW" BEHAVIOR HERE. God says: do NOT use obscene language:

Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking, which are out of place, but rather thanksgiving. Ephesians 5:4

This is simple basic principles. I cannot believe how little you know about the bible's teachings.

you were just an ignoramus, a hypocrite, or if your bigotry extended towards other non-Baptist or evangelical denominations besides the Catholics.

ignoramus definition: doesn't know or a stupidity

One of my Professors told me once:

Do you know the difference between dumb and stupidity? Dumb: is when someone doesn't know and Stupidity: is when someone knows it's wrong to do, but they do it anyway.

You keep calling me names when you know it's wrong (even by Catholic standards) but you do it anyway.

Hypocrite comes from the word "hypocrisy" meaning: the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

You speak of God's idioms in the Bible and say that Catholics belong to Christianity but you (Pastrami) call me "ignoramus hypocrite" claiming to know about the teachings of God but your own behavior does NOT conform to godly practices. Colossians 3:12

Jesus says "But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. Matthew 5:39

I have turned the other cheek whenever you have called me ugly and slanderous names, over and over again.

TOO MUCH INFORMATION: beep* or bs. Just let it go. I have prayed for you and science-forum. That is the Christian thing to do. Pastrami, you should try it sometime. Give your anger to God, not to me. Tell God what bothers you, He can comfort you, like nothing or no one else can. Thank you Jesus! Praise God!

[–] archer1812 9 years ago

I NEVER said it was wrong to use the Cross in Churches...
My knowledge is in Scripture. You have NO knowledge of Scripture, just your own talk.

Not the Cross. You brought up the "carved-image of Jesus on the Cross" which is called a Crucifix (ffs,don't tell me that you don't know the difference) as a way to discredit the Church and support your idiotic and ridiculous claim that they aren't Christian. So if you use this against Catholics, you'd have to do the same to other denominations lest you be seen as the hypocrite that you are.

All you know about scripture are a few passages that hear and read and then just parrot them without understanding context or deeper meaning. That's all you are, a parrot.

Catholics do NOT teach the bible book in religion class. You should know this. Oh that is right, you went to Catholic school in South Africa, NOT here in the United States. Catholic Schools in the U.S. teach from books (with stories) that they buy for their religion classes. I went to St. Anthony's Elementary in Oakland, CA from the time I was 5 years old (first grade) to the 4th grade, then I attended public schools for two years, then I attended St. Elizabeth's Elementary in the 7th and 8th grade. Back then, the Catholics Schools did NOT teach out of the bible, then HOW WAS I SUPPOSED TO KNOW ABOUT EXODUS 20:4?

SOUTH AMERICA! FFS, you're just as bad in Geography as you are in everything else.
Hard to believe that they didn't teach you scripture in Religion class. Or that you didn't read it or hear it in Church. But, as you already shown yourself to be a liar (as I proved in the other post), then why should I believe you?

As for Exodus 20:4? How were you supposed to know? By paying attention in Mass, that's one that is often reviewed. Or by reading it on your own. Were you too lazy to do that? And now, don't tell me that you're misinterpreting that passage as well. Boy are you hopeless 

As for the rest, quit your whining. I didn't call you anything that you are not. And the thing is you keep proving me right.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

To Pastrami:

your false, non-biblical beliefs instead of talking *beep* about Catholics. Misrepresentations and lies, such a good little "christian" you are.

Let's say that you believe it's okay to have a stone-carve Jesus on the cross in your home BUT God says in Exodus 20:4

"You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below."

It's NOT my false belief AND it is NOT lies because GOD commanded it and the proof is written in Exodus 20:4

It's NOT non-biblical because God's commanded it and factually in the Bible: Book of Exodus, Chapter 20, Verse 4

http://biblehub.com/exodus/20-4.htm -REFERENCE

You are NOT disagreeing with me but you are disagreeing with God. I would ask God to give you understanding, as God gives generously if it's according to His will.

If you refuse to accept/understand what I am saying that is on you. God gives us the freedom of making our own choices. So if you want to turn your back on what God says (Exodus 20:4), don't say to Jesus on Judgment Day that no one ever told you that going to a Church with the carving of a Jesus on their cross is okay. What you do is your business, you are NOT hurting me but bringing violent actions (insults) on Jesus because Jesus is the vine and I am a branch of that vine. John 15:5 What you do to me, you do to Jesus.

http://biblehub.com/john/15-5.htm - REFERENCE

I wasn't reading my bible when I attended those Catholic Schools (1965-1973) but now, I know and I did something about it, I don't attend Catholic Churches, anymore. My choice to heed to -Exodus 20:4- One of God's Ten Commandments.

[–] archer1812 8 years ago

And here is further proof that you were never a Catholic.
Everything that you wrote is wrong. You've been brainwashed by your cultist baptist sect. One thing is to be ignorant. Another is to be willfully ignorant. It's inexcusable. And that's you. You are beyond redemption.

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

My answer: why don't you spend less time worrying about other people (Greeks, etc) and worry about your own SALVATION. At the end, we will solely be responsible for ourselves, when we faced Jesus, face to face (on Judgment Day).

Why? Because Jesus COMMANDED his followers to "worry" about other people. I would encourage you to read the Gospels and become much more familiar with Jesus' teachings. While you are doing that, pay special attention to the Great Commission. Ask yourself whether it harmonizes with the opinions you've expressed above.

[–] archer1812 9 years ago

You know, I seriously doubt that she was ever a Catholic. Some of her comments and questions lead me to believe that she knows nothing about the RMC. Not its beliefs, practices, doctrines or history.

I admit that I'm pretty ignorant myself on the subject. I know the basic elements (tradidions, practices, the sacraments). I know quite a lot of its history. But I'm still pretty ignorant on the deeper stuff. I suspect (actually, I'm sure) that you as non Catholic know a heck of lot more about my former faith than I do. I have to tell you that I've learned a few things by reading your comments. So this hasn't been a total waste of time. So cheers to you for that.


[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] archer1812 9 years ago

Ha! As I read your first paragraph about the "consumerist Christianity" the first name that popped up in my mind was Joel Osteen. And a couple of lines later there he was!

I think that you're spot-on on your assessment. I'd like to hear how she'll respond, particularly on Charles Stanley's postion on the matter.

A bit off-topic, but I'd like to hear your opinion on something. A few days back I was talking with a co-worker and the topic lead to religion. He mention Protestants, and specifically he referred to Anglicans. I counter by saying that Anglicans are not Protestants. That their break was not due to fundamental doctrinal differences. He said that by the mere fact that they broke away makes them Protestant. What do you think?

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

A bit off-topic, but I'd like to hear your opinion on something. A few days back I was talking with a co-worker and the topic lead to religion. He mention Protestants, and specifically he referred to Anglicans. I counter by saying that Anglicans are not Protestants. That their break was not due to fundamental doctrinal differences. He said that by the mere fact that they broke away makes them Protestant. What do you think?

ANSWER TO QUESTION FROM ViscountofPistrami

This question is debated among both academics and the general public. Like virtually everything involving people, and especially religion, "It's complicated."

Yes, Anglicanism came about via an atypical route because of political factors and the well-known drama surrounding Henry the Eighth. HOWEVER, it is easy for non-academics to overlook the political factors playing important roles with various other Reformation movements and factions in Protestant Europe. For that and many other reasons, I am reluctant to declare Anglicanism as separate from "textbook Protestantism" due to that historical pedigree alone.

Moreover, Protestantism is usually divided by academics into eight branches, of which Anglicanism isn't really any more "unique" than the other seven. It just depends on what taxonomy you are using. Also, I would point out that the word "Anglican" simply means "English" and that "Anglicanism" is ultimately whatever the English churches of that era were doing. Yes, Anglicanism is generally defined as that group of independent English churches which are in fellowship with the Archbishop of Canterbury (before long it became virtually all of them, historically.) So my personal perspective is to answer your question by asking a closely related one:

If Henry the VIII had NOT been the center of such high drama at the time, where would Christianity in England have headed in that tumultuous era?

And first I must emphasize that Anglican Church History (nor even Reformation History) is not at all my specialization as an academic, nor did I generally teach history other than general History of Western Civilization colloquium courses for honors students (which were taught by professors volunteering from a wide range of departments.) Most of my work has been in Biblical linguistics, exegesis, and Ancient Near Eastern Languages & Cultures. So my opinions about Anglicanism within Reformation Studies have limited academic standing---just as Richard Dawkins addressing philosophy, religious studies, and history is largely irrelevant to the academy. [I know well my limitations. Unfortunately, people like Dawkins either do not or pretend that they don't.]

Anyway, I'll repeat the question:

If Henry the VIII had NOT been the center of such high drama at the time, where would Christianity in England have headed in that tumultuous era?

I'm prone to think that "Anglicanism" was INEVITABLY prone to develop as one of the eight major branches of Protestant Christianity. If you examine the writings of English theologians/clerics of the mid-16th century, you will find remarkable similarities to those of their similarly "challenged and challenging" contemporaries on the European mainland. As an example, consider the very influential (that's an understatement) Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Cranmer, who was very clearly plotting a course somewhere approximately midway between Lutheranism and Calvinism, probably the two most significant steadily emerging traditions of the Protestant Reformation.

Of course, Anglicanism "stuck out like a sore thumb", so to speak, among the various branches of Protestantism because of its very traditional liturgy. That is, of all of the branches of Protestantism, Anglicanism---even in the average worship service---looked and sounded far too "Roman Catholic" for more rebellious Protestants to stomach. Appearances can and do matter. But I see it as Anglicanism resolving NOT to "throw out the baby with the bathwater" and preserving that which they thought salvageable, and not play the crude guilt-by-association game. (Of course, seeing how they had ransacked and pillaged a lot of monasteries, etc., they simply chose to focus their destructive outbursts elsewhere other than the liturgy!)

Yes, Anglicanism got to its Protestant destination by its own very English route. But the special role of English politics and royal drama was not as if the German Reformation was entirely apolitical. And that fact that the development of Anglicanism was independent of "mainstream" Reformation Protestantism on the mainland in many respects doesn't change the fact that the underlying theological forces were much the same. So I'm quite willing to call Anglicanism fully Protestant by both historical pedigree and theological doctrine.

It is also worth noting that John Hus, the enormously significant Czech reformer, called the English priest, John Wycliffe, "the morning star of the Reformation." So that was just the beginning of what would eventually trend to be a mutual respect and general recognition that the many branches of the Protestant Reformation were an inevitable diversity that comprised the massive European exodus from the Church of Rome.

AN ASIDE: I consider this topic one where the student's perspective can be greatly influenced by whether history is taught according to the very traditional paradigm of "kings and battles" versus the more modern "ideas and cultures" view of history. In the "kings and battles" approach to history, it is easy to see Anglicanism as an historical fluke that came about because Henry the VIII had problems producing a son---and in that view it is easy to conclude that Anglicanism wasn't "true Protestantism". (Perhaps it is artificially imposed Protestantism via royal decree?) But if you view history as individuals and their ideas and how they impacted their culture, it is much easier to see Anglicanism as simply the English path to Protestantism, one that would have succeeded in reaching its eventual destination even if the English monarchy had never played such a central role.

You asked a very good question! So I hope my answer was helpful.

Of course, our outspoken 2Tim.3:16 will most likely call me a not-at-all-good-Christian--minister and not to be believed according to her mother---and perhaps she will tell you that you should have consulted Billy Graham or Charles Stanley instead, even though they never claimed to be professors or especially knowledgeable about such topics.

(This fact is especially funny:
Charles Stanley was not one of my students, but if he had started his seminary studies just a few years earlier, and if I had made a different choice between two academic contract offers, I easily could have been one of Stanley's seminary professors. But I suppose it wouldn't have mattered because she would say that she was sick to her stomach because I was bragging. However, while Charles Stanley is a good and honorable fellow, I doubt if any of my academic colleagues are "bragging" that Stanley was one of their students. In all of my years in academia, I never heard a colleague "take credit" for the popularity of some "Christian celebrity" student. That's just not part of the culture.)

[–] archer1812 9 years ago

Yes, your answer was very helpful. Thank you. And you are right, it is more complicated than I had originally thought.

I hadn't considered the entire context. I did view it, as you put it, in the "kings and battles" paradigm: They broke mostly for political reasons, not religious ones. And of course because of Henry's little familial trouble and his wondering eye. Otherwise, they remained very much "Catholic", in structure, in liturgy. Just completely independent from Rome. In my view, since at that time there was no significant, ground-shaking reformation, they weren't technically Protestant.

I hadn't considered that there had been an undercurrent of "protestanism" present in England for a long time. A dissatisfaction with the path the Church had taken. An affinity of some English theologians and leaders with the Reformation movement in Europe. And that it played a part in breaking away. At the very least it made acceptance of that break palatable among a significant segment of the population. Eventually, more slowly, reformation did happen.

Still, I don't think that that's enough. I'm not ready to put them in the Protestant camp. But you have given me a lot of food for thought. And more homework to do. Lol

If Henry the VIII had NOT been the center of such high drama at the time, where would Christianity in England have headed in that tumultuous era?

I'm still not convinced that the Church of England would had broken away from Rome hadn't not been for Henry VIII. Maybe, eventually. Decades, generations later, in a "velvet revolution" kind of way. The English are very independent and proud of their "Englishness" after all. So is wouldn't be surprising if they had at one point. But Certainly not during Henry's reign if Catherine had given him a healthy male heir. After all, he had been a devout Catholic all his life. But history is so complicated, alliances are made and broken, one event can change the course of history. So who really knows what would had happen.

As an aside, it's funny to me how a conversation with a co-worker that began about Hammer horror films lead to a discussion about the English Reformation with a stranger on an internet forum. Or maybe is just really late and is time to go to bed.

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

Yes, a good case can be made for the idea that England would have remained Roman Catholic. (Personally, I think it would have eventually joined the Reformation, but the very slow process would have taken generations longer without Henry VIII. And the resulting modern day result would probably be far less lopsided than the Protestant vs. RC stats we see in the UK today.)

This is a good example of a context where Socratic teaching should prevail in the undergraduate university classroom. I once had my students write papers on what they predicted would have happened without Henry's agenda. I didn't care which side they took, only that they learn to interact with the available evidence. It is a fascinating topic and the honors students did extremely well with it. Indeed, I learned a lot from reading their papers---exactly as I had hoped!

You might enjoy the following overview of those events. You can find many presentations online toward either conclusion but this is just a good example of the rich historical fodder one can work from:

https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=7653

(I'm not endorsing it as the best or necessarily the "right" view. I just think it is a good example of a rich overview. It sure beats the ubiquitous "soap opera" genre of both daytime and evening TV in America today. Real drama for thinking people!)

By the way, I think the Vatican released some of the key documents of that Henry VIII episode not so long ago. What fascinates me most is that someone of Henry's impressive education would have such naive strategies for trying to convince the Pope to give him what he wanted. There are many interesting lessons from it on many levels. (I don't know if any of Woolsey's personal reflections survive in his papers but this is the kind of topic which a PhD student can have great fun.)

One observation that adds to the fun: I recall a colleague of long ago who did a lot of work searching out and analyzing the GRAFFITI of that era! It makes such a fascinating look at what a semi-average (!), observant Englishman of that day thought about the entire matter. I don't recall where all he found them, but your question has made me curious to possibly seeking out what has been published to see where his career led him and what he discovered from such a scattered collection of "informal" evidence.

Also by the way: I'm often saddened by the kind of education which hard-core traditionalists and fundamentalists (of whom someone like 2Tim 3:16 might be influenced and/or even affiliated) tend to get at Christian institutions where they are simply TOLD what to think is the "right answer" to questions like yours. They tell them what "a good Christian SHOULD think" rather than teaching HOW to review evidence and to gather an informed perspective on a controversial matter. Fortunately, the best evangelical Christian universities and grad schools are not so much like that. Many of them provide just as solid of an academic approach to such questions---and their PhD graduates are just as well educated as those of the very best universities of the world. I had the pleasure of watching that "blossoming" of an exceptionally strong evangelical academy in the USA over the course of my career. (Seriously, I couldn't honestly make such glowing recommendations back in the 1960's and 1970's, although the beginnings were underway.)

I wish you well on your pursuit of knowledge and insights. Your question has been an enjoyable diversion for me. And I hope that my response has been a positive reminder that popular stereotypes and cliches about Christian evangelicals and their academics are not accurate across the board. (Those descriptions only apply to a very loud but limited subset of the evangelical world.) Indeed, I helped found the Bible.and.Science.Forum to make clear that informed evangelicals are just as annoyed by the folly of Young Earth Creationist origins-ministry entrepreneurs and conmen as everyone else. (You may find https://bibleandscienceforum.wordpress.com/ of interest.)

Now......I can sit back and look forward to 2Tim3:16's declarations of my consummate evil and alleged "bragging" and how I should defer to her greater wisdom on such matters. No doubt my response to your question is vastly inferior to that which Charles Stanley or Billy Graham might have provided. (As a matter of fact, I would very interested in hearing their answers to your question. My hunch is that Graham would do as he often did and graciously defer to his academic friends with words something like this: "I'm not a scholar of theology or history and have never claimed to be, but I've had the pleasure of working closely with many Christian brothers and sisters who are, such as when Carl F.H. Henry and I launched Christianity Today magazine, and in the course of my work with Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary." Likewise, Stanley would similarly defer to his friends in the Southern Baptist Convention academy. (I never had reason to collaborate with Billy Graham, but I did get to know Carl & Helga Henry quite well. Those who are curious to get to know the "behind the scenes" Billy Graham would do well to read the late Dr. Henry's excellent but generally overlooked autobiography. I was surprised that virtually everyone ignored that book (unlike his very important theological tomes which are still assigned reading on many campuses) when he includes many insightful accounts of how Graham operated as an administrator and very strong-willed type of leader. (As with so many of us, the public Graham and the private Graham are very different persons. Carl was not afraid to tell people that Graham didn't walk on water and has never been hesitant to twisting arms or being very "political" to get his way.)

[–] archer1812 9 years ago

Thanks for the link. It does interest me. I'll read it this weekend when I'm not pressed for time and won't be constantly interrupted. And your forum as well. Just a quick glance leads me to believe that is the antitheses of Answers in Genesis.

[–] archer1812 9 years ago

Of course, our outspoken 2Tim.3:16 will most likely call me a not-at-all-good-Christian--minister and not to be believed according to her mother---and perhaps she will tell you that you should have consulted Billy Graham or Charles Stanley instead, even though they never claimed to be professors or especially knowledgeable about such topics.

I definitely can see that 
Though I'm not so sure that she'll show up again. At least not for a while. Maybe a few months from now I will get a notification that she had once again responded to one of my comments, long after I had forgotten all about her.

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

It sounds like you have much more experience with 2Tim3:16 than I do. I really do feel sad for her. She is a victim of her background and experiences, and as she explained, she has had nothing but "feel good" always-encouraging types of pastors who never really challenged her or anybody in their flock----and certainly didn't teach them to think and to learn to where they challenged themselves. Yet, it was probably a "us versus them" mentality all of them time, where both atheists and the Christians who didn't hold exactly the same beliefs were seen as enemies to be despised (and certainly not someone to learn from by hearing another point of view.) It has clearly left her frustrated and very drained. So even though she is condemning and combative, I mostly see her as a victim of the manipulations and deception of others. I do hope she grows beyond it and finds some sense of personal peace.

Hero-based faith systems (where people decide "I'm going to agree with everything Rev. X or Dr. Y believes because they seem very genuine and God surely wouldn't allow them to be wrong.") seem very fulfilling for a while, because the person doesn't have to do any hard thinking or confront any difficult challenges. But eventually it lets them down amid the difficulties of life and circumstances. For many, when the big challenges come, it overwhelms them and they end up throwing EVERYTHING away---and go from one extreme to the other. (Thus, I've known a lot of atheist students who were ex-YECs, and were very bitter at having been lied to and manipulated by Young Earth Creationist ministry leaders and their pastors. Both extremes tend to involve a lot of pathological lying and ignored evidence. People who reached their positions by more deliberative and gradual research and growth tend to do so without the extreme bitterness and vitriol.)

However, when I was more active online in my reaching out to present and former YECs and helping them to abandon their false dichotomies of science and the Bible at inevitable war with each other, I had a steady stream of individuals who were willing to cautiously read some of my essays and even investigate some of the scientific and exegetical evidences I recommended to them. By a year or two later, I got some very nice followup messages telling me about how they had "mellowed" and were willing to consider the evidence-based positions I had explained to them. They realized that it was NOT just a rigid dichotomy of "good people" versus "evil people" where the latter individuals thought the world was billions of years old because "they hated God".

Many shared with me more of their personally histories of HOW they had become so bitter towards people who saw the evidence for an old earth and even the Theory of Evolution. They were very relieved to leave the bitterness behind. Followers of science-illiterate, Bible-illiterate nuts like Ken Ham and Ray Comfort have done a lot of damage to the reputations of American evangelical movements and have created increasingly cult-like followings and ministry operations. I feel very sad to have played a part in creating cultic-YECism in America through my "creation science" activism of the 1960's and early 1970's. I was a head-strong, relatively young science professor (who later changed fields to become a humanities scholar) who was certain that I had all of the answers, because I thought very similarly to 2Tim3:16 in blindly assuming that my favorite Christian "celebrity scholars" (Drs. Gish, Morris, and Whitcomb) knew what they were talking about and were surely very careful in their scholarship and even their footnoting and attributions. They weren't. But it took me years to come to grips with how I had been manipulated and deceived.

And that probably explains why I have so much compassion for 2Tim3:16 despite the way she treated me here. She and many others are victims of the same unbiblical forces today which I found myself in during the early 1960's when I got drawn into the "creation science" movement as a "rising star" science professor who could win every debate and win over audiences of Christians bused in from churches in the region. (They were "pre-programmed" to agree with me because they identified me as of their same doctrinal orientation. So it was like I always had a "hometeam advantage", even when speaking/debating on a university campus where I was the token evangelical fundamentalist Christian.)

I wish you well in your ongoing research and education.

[–] archer1812 9 years ago

Perhaps I should look at it that way, that she's just a victim and doesn't know any better. And I should just feel sorry for her and let it go. But it does irk me when people like her go around spreading that nonsense. And I take that very personally. I am no longer practicing Catholic. But I am what could be described as a cultural Catholic. It is part of me, part of who I am. And my father is a very devout person, he's a man of much faith. So yeah, I take it personally.

Yes, she engaged me first, a couple of months ago. I simply responded to the OP's question and she jumped right in saying how wrong I was, that true Christians believe in the rapture and then start with the Catholics not being Christian. She has since deleted or edited most of those comments. But that's how it started.

You know, when I first came to the U.S. I was shocked when I first heard that there were people who believed that the Earth was less than 10yo and that didn't believe (accepted is the better term) in evolution. I do mean shocked, flabbergasted. It had never occurred to me that that could be a reality. Particularly in one of the most advanced countries in the world. In my Jesuit ran school I was taught Evolution in 5th grade (it might have started in 4th). In 3rd grade we began to study cosmology. And there was never a conflict between faith and science. Evolution happened, the Universe is ~14 billion years old. It is what science tells us. And it's part of God's plan. There just isn't that conflict in Catholicism. Though I have since learned that here in the US there are some Catholic YECs.

I can certainly understand the bitterness that former YECs can feel at having been lied to. Fortunately for me that wasn't the case. I have to admit that people like Ham, Hovnid, Comfort, and a bunch of other ones, have made me leery of Evangelicals and fundamentalist Christianity. To the point that when I hear or meet someone who identifies himself as such in my mind I'm prepared to automatically dismiss everything that they have to say. It is a prejudice. But I'm glad that there are people like you out there who challenges that.

If I may ask, how and why did you turn away from the creation science movement?

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

ViscountofPastrami wrote:

If I may ask, how and why did you turn away from the creation science movement?

The Young Earth Creationist would like to chant their mantra that everyone who leaves the YEC world do so in order to please their atheist peers. (Seriously. I hear that often.)

My story probably isn't at all typical. Initially, it wasn't brought about through my science education or even my review of the scientific evidence for the age of the earth or the lack of evidence of a global flood---although that COULD have been a viable exit route. No, for me it was two things:

1) I witnessed from the inside a lot of the contradictions, hypocrisies, and dishonesties of the "creation science" movement. The deceptive quote-mining was especially disturbing and the promises to fix various factual errors in the "next edition of my book", yet the error was repeated at a "creation conference" at another church a week or two later. I realized that Drs. Gish, Morris, and Whitcomb behaved like propagandists, not scholars.

2) Yet, the BIGGEST factor for me was my study of Biblical Hebrew and realizing that the Bible itself did not support so many aspects of the Young Earth Creationist campaign. I should probably emphasize that it was more than just learning Classical Hebrew per se but learning at the feet of some of the world's top linguists and grasping more of how language works. Thankfully, the best evangelical scholars today have much more familiarity with what has come to be called "Biblical linguistics" and that is yet another major reason why so much of the evangelical academy rejects the amateurish exegesis of the Ham, Hoving, Comfort et al clown car.

It was actually not until I retired that I had the time to supplement my scientific knowledge to where that gave me a solid grasp of evolutionary biology, the consilience of evidence from physics, geology, biology, and paleontology for a very old biosphere, and a greater impression of the massive quantities and qualities of evidence for the earth's long history. But even without that, the Bible itself (especially the Hebrew texts of the Old Testament and Greek text of the New) had conclusively quashed my former acceptance of Gish-Morris-Whitcomb YECism. As a Biblical scholar, I'm actually happy that the sequence of discovery followed that natural route.

I continue to find NOTHING within the Bible which denies the Theory of Evolution. And I have yet to encounter a fellow Christian who disagrees with me who actually knows what evolution is and can summarize the evidence for the Theory of Evolution. (I'm not saying that such a person doesn't exist, only that I have not yet personally met such a person. Instead, I keep meeting opponents who confuse the Theory of Evolution with abiogenesis and the Big Bang Theory!)

You might find some of the forums at Biologos.org interesting. I don't necessarily agree with everything they publish but I applaud their "wide tent" approach to the topic.

By the way, when angry Christian colleagues ask me how Genesis 1 could possibly harmonize with the Theory of Evolution, I tell them that I consider the text an obvious example of a "hymnic tribute" to the Creator. It consists of six "verses" structured to correspond to days of the week, each followed by a repeating chorus-refrain: "And the evening and the morning was the Nth YOM." It was never meant to be a retelling of historical chronology (thus, the many internal self-contradictions everybody notices) but was focused on explaining that the God of Israel was a deity who was sovereign over ALL domains of the world, in contrast to the pantheon of gods and goddesses of neighboring cultures who were in charge of individual domains (e.g., god of the sea, goddess of fertility and nature's bounty, god of the air.) Indeed, the original ancient audience would have been surprised that anybody would expect the text to be understood in any other way. (After all, there is a clear 3 + 3 chiasmic structure to the days of creation.)

Of course, they will protest, "Genesis 1 is NOT mere poetry!" First, why the "mere"? Poetry can be a very grand genre and even more expressive than prose. Secondly, Hebrew poetry (and the literature genres which preceded it by many centuries, from which Genesis 1 may actually originate) comes in many forms. Moreover, it doesn't have to be considered a traditional poem like that of much later portions of the Old Testament. And that is why I prefer a very generic term like "hymnic tribute". It is structured like a hymn with verses and a repeating chorus. We can't judge it by anachronistically imposing our modern day obsessions with chronology and scientific rigor. (And ancient Hebrew didn't even have the time-based verbal tense inflections and auxiliary words we take for granted in so many modern day languages. The ancient Hebrew weren't so obsessed with chronological order and order-of-events narrative itself.) The original intent was to declare the supremacy of Israel's God and the contrast with the inferior pantheons of neighboring cultures who had no concept of one deity over all and controlling every domain of human experience.

By the way, Genesis 2 is not a second, alternative creation account. It is the story of a particular ERETZ ("land", "region", NOT the earth/world), the special garden reserve that God planted in the Eden region. It is NOT a description of the entire planet. That's why it had no thorns or weeds. (Gardens are meant to cultivate solely the plants which have special benefits for people.) Both pericopes, Genesis 1 and 2, had probably been passed down for many centuries before the Hebrew language and culture existed, and so it was natural for the Hebrews to include them as a "Foreword" to the book of Genesis, the story of God's people, the Children of Israel. That's why they titled the book, *beep* ("in the beginning"), explained by the fact that books were called by the initial word(s) of that text. The Hebrew called the book *beep* because it was about the history of God's people, NOT because the book was meant to tell the story of how the world begin. No, the creation of the world is a very brief topic which receives little emphasis in a book where most of the fifty chapters are about the patriarchs, the life stories of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob-Israel, and the twelve sons who fathered the twelve tribes of Israel.

The most important translation reality necessary for understanding the early chapters of Genesis is this: ERETZ, in both Ancient Hebrew and Modern Hebrew, means "land", "country", "region" and sometimes "soil". To translate it as "planet earth" is both anachronistic and misleading. Indeed, if one visits the website of the Nation of Israel, you'll find the Biblical phrase ERETZ YISRAEL. It has NEVER meant "Planet Israel". It has always been correctly rendered "Land of Israel" or "Nation of Israel" because that is the correct understanding of the word ERETZ. It was only be TRADITION that early English Bible translations started making an exception in the early chapters of Genesis and leading people to assume that "planet earth" was the intention. "The heavens and the earth" was an idiom basically equivalent to "everything" or "the universe". That's why I usually translate it as "the sky and the land", in order to better capture their ancient cosmology. They had none of our modern concept of spherical planets orbiting the sun.

Likewise, the Noahic Flood was a great deluge of Noah's ERETZ, the only land he knew. ERETZ could have been in the plural to emphasize that ALL LANDS were flooded---but they weren't and so the word was singular. Indeed, when I realized that NOTHING in Genesis 6 to 9 referred to a planet-wide flood, I realized that the GLOBAL flood was merely a cherished TRADITION, not a scriptural teaching. Modern Bible translations usually provide translation footnotes to help make that clear, but traditionalists are intentionally pacified by leaving the main text suitably ambiguous.

So, as you can see, simply realizing the correct translation of the Hebrew word ERETZ (meaning "land"/"country"/"region", not "planet earth") set the stage for my realization that a major pillar of Young Earth Creationism was defied by the Biblical text itself!

You will find this concept re-affirmed in many of the articles at https://bibleandscienceforum.wordpress.com/ and the Professor Tertius Facebook articles, and elsewhere.

[–] archer1812 9 years ago

I consider the text an obvious example of a "hymnic tribute" to the Creator. It consists of six "verses" structured to correspond to days of the week, each followed by a repeating chorus-refrain: "And the evening and the morning was the Nth YOM." It was never meant to be a retelling of historical chronology (thus, the many internal self-contradictions everybody notices) but was focused on explaining that the God of Israel was a deity who was sovereign over ALL domains of the world, in contrast to the pantheon of gods and goddesses of neighboring cultures who were in charge of individual domains (e.g., god of the sea, goddess of fertility and nature's bounty, god of the air.) Indeed, the original ancient audience would have been surprised that anybody would expect the text to be understood in any other way. (After all, there is a clear 3 + 3 chiasmic structure to the days of creation.)

That's how we understand it. Not as a historical chronology or scientific treatise, but as an allegorical telling of Creation, one easily understood by the people of its time. Since the days of St Agustin its been seen that way. I do like your use of "hymnic tribute" and its explanation. I hadn't considered the structure as poetry w/ repeating chorus, which is so easylly to see now.
And of course is worth noting that even though it is structure as a 6 day creation, the word Yom doesn't necessarily mean a 24 hour day. It can also men an unspecified span of time. Though in this case it can be open to interpretation as not as obvious as the misinterpretation of Eretz.

So, as you can see, simply realizing the correct translation of the Hebrew word ERETZ (meaning "land"/"country"/"region", not "planet earth") set the stage for my realization that a major pillar of Young Earth Creationism was defied by the Biblical text itself!

That is interesting. I can imagine your reaction when it first dawned on you.

I should mention that my participation on forums like IMDB is sporadic at most, so if you have other questions which you post here, you might want to email a copy to me at Bible.and.Science.Forum at the gmail.com domain or I may not see it.

I'll keep that in mind. It has been interesting reading your comments.
BTW, I read the article over the weekend, it was very good.

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

People will argue over the definition of "poetry" and "poetic", so that is one of several reasons why I started using the term "hymnic tribute". After all, where does the boundary of prose end and poetry begin? The Young Earth Creationists will always complain "It is not like typical Hebrew poetry found in Psalms", as if that settles the matter. My point is that it comes from centuries prior and probably a non-Semitic culture. So whether it is prose with poetic elements or something which has largely been lost to history, I simply call it "a hymnic tribute" so as to avoid genre arguments entirely. It is obviously six verses with repeating choruses. That's for sure. And that is enough to make the fundamentalists angry. (They really don't have much respect for ancient genres. They act like the poetic and hymnic is something shameful.)

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

Also, ViscountofPastrami, I should mention that my participation on forums like IMDB is sporadic at most, so if you have other questions which you post here, you might want to email a copy to me at Bible.and.Science.Forum at the gmail.com domain or I may not see it. Due to work on my magnum opus and some of the limitations which come with age, I no longer post new blog articles, and my Q&A postings are infrequent.

By the way, an agnostic paleontologist friend, an atheist biologist, and several other academic acquaintances often post in the comment sections under the Amazon book reviews under Stephen Meyer's Darwin's Doubt. That can also be a good place for posting questions about everything from Hebrew exegesis to taxonomy and phylogenetic trees. We have a good time interacting there while exposing anti-evolution and YECist nonsense. I know of few other places online where the reader can informally interact with world-class scientists concerning these origins-related topics, all while watching YECist propaganda disintegrate under its own folly. Very educational and often humorous.

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

To Pastrami or Archer812:

Though I'm not so sure that she'll show up again. At least not for a while. Maybe a few months from now I will get a notification that she had once again responded to one of my comments..

My husband has just been diagnosed with Cancer, a few weeks ago. On top of his chronic Liver Disease, ending stages. The Doctors performed surgery but later we were told that my husband still has more Cancer that they didn't get it all. So I hope you are real happy with yourself, talking about me with your pal Science-forum instead of being Christ-like Christian and treating people with compassion and forgiveness. As you can see, I have had a lot to deal with, besides my own acute illnesses. Pastrami/Archer, you need to take a stand, either be kind or evil, you can't go east and west at the same time, neither can you be good and evil at the same time. Well actually you could but what good would it do you on Judgment Day? I was going to remove my posts about Catholics but rushing I couldn't find them.

I just read one of your old posts and here is the answer:

It's NOT a sin to have a Crucifix in any Church but it's a sin for having a carving of Jesus on the Crucifix, which is against what God told us NOT to do: ""You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven.." Exodus 20:4
To my knowledge, only Catholic Churches have a carved-image of Jesus on their Crucifix. Other Churches have Crucifixes but no image of Jesus on them.

I read what you told Science-forum about me that you didn't believe I attended a Catholic Church but I did, why would I lie about something like that?

I attended Saint Anthony Elementary School in Oakland, CA in 1965-1966 for 4 years.
I attended Saint Elizabeth Elementary School in Oakland, CA in the 7th grade and possibly some of the 8th grade but I don't really remember.
I am 56 years old, going on 57 years old so I am sure, things have really changed a lot in their teaching methods.

My favorite songs from Catholic school:
O Come All Ye Faithful - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=el0xSM3fx_I - same lyrics
The First Noel
There is a song that goes "O Maria" but I can't remember the name of the song but the Mormon Tabernacle Choir plays it, too.

Can you stop hating now? I am sorry for hurting you. We kept going back and forth but now, I am just plain tired, can we please let it go now? Or do you want to hold on to this grudge against me? Do you think Jesus wants you to? I am willing to meet you have way. Or would you rather keep talking about me with Science-forum? It's your choice.

Jesus replied, "Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them. John 14:23

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

To Pastrami:

Two Months later

I do have a life, outside of these posts. :-) lol

1 John 3:8

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] archer1812 8 years ago

You are a Baptist, are you not? You've said it several times.
And you constantly protest agains the RCC, so you are a 'protestant' (small p).

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

To Pastrami:

And you constantly protest against the Roman Catholic Church, so you are a 'protestant' (small p).

No, now I am a non-denomination believer of Jesus Christ. Non-denomination is someone who follows the teachings of Jesus Christ (Bible) but I am open to the First Southern Baptist Church and the Church of Church teachings, as I have attended and been baptized at both Churches. I rather not be labeled, as this or that but just put my trust in Jesus Christ.

It is NOT like I am holding a sign protesting at Catholic Churches. They are allow to follow their own choices of beliefs, same as other Churches. Like the Jehovah Witnesses don't celebrate Christmas and other traditions, that is their God given right. I don't celebrate Christmas anymore, does that make me a Jehovah Witness? No, I am not a Jehovah Witness but I do agree on the reason why they don't celebrate Christmas, like most people do. I rather call myself a believer of Jesus Christ. I mean honestly, what is the point in believing in Jesus, if I don't trust his instructions that you find in the New Testament? That is my choice.

I looked up protestant meaning, I can see why you thought I was a protestant.

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=what+is+the+name+of+the+protestant+church+in+the+us - reference
I don't attend a Methodist Church, Presbyterian Church, or the Episcopal Church

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestantism - reference

1 John 3:8

[–] archer1812 8 years ago

Either way, most "non-denominational" have a Calvinist bent, so yeah, that's protestant. Anyway, up until now you've claimed that you attend a Baptist church.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

the nearest Baptist church to me, the FBC of Pasadena

Citation needed. Else you're just spreading false rumors.

Name, Address and telephone number and the person you spoke to because you could be lying, is a possibility.

1 John 3:8

[–] archer1812 8 years ago

Citation needed. Else you're just spreading false rumors.

Name, Address and telephone number and the person you spoke to because you could be lying, is a possibility.

I already gave you a citation. First Baptist Church of Pasadena.

Were you too lazy to look them up? Since you are obviously incapable of doing a simple google search, here it is. Knock yourself out.

75 N. Marengo Ave, Pasadena, CA 91101 (626)793-7164

Ask for Suzy. Or Pastor Hasper if he's available.

Paraphrasing the answer that I got: " [almost a chuckle] No, of course we don't believe that they [Catholics]are not Christian. We believe in the same God and we both follow Jesus".

As for accusing me of lying, well, I'll translate a well-known saying in Spanish.
The thief judges others by his own condition. IOW, just because you are a liar, it doesn't mean that others are too.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

As for accusing me of lying

NO, what I say was: you could be lying. If I had called you a liar, it would be written like this: "Pastrami you are a liar." I didn't say that. I said you could be lying, is a possibility. Big difference.

I am very busy taking care of someone very ill and I don't have a whole lot of time, most days. If the Lord wills, and I live, I will call the number you listed and I will ask them:

If they consider themselves the same as Catholics and share the same beliefs as Catholics? That is the right question.

BTW, I am from the Bay Area, California. Currently, we live in Oklahoma, for the last 3 years. The Lord has blessed us with a brand new house. Earlier, in 2007, we traveled across the United States, in a venture to find a rental home with a country setting. The Lord has blessed us very generously, to do what I love doing: lots of ROAD TRIPS. God blesses the obedient.

Reference: https://www.intouch.org/read/life-principle-21-obedience-always-brings-blessing

just because you are a liar

this violates the terms and conditions of imdb.com. IMDb doesn't allow people to attack others with hateful language. Imdb will delete your posts like that.

All you need to say is simply 'Yes' or 'No'; anything beyond this comes from the evil one. Matthew 5:37

[–] archer1812 8 years ago

If they consider themselves the same as Catholics and share the same beliefs as Catholics? That is the right question.

No. That's not the question, don't play dumb.
This is what you said:

You are obviously not a Christian or a Catholic, to know that Catholics are NOT Christians, most everyone knows that. How would you know what the Christian Denomination says, when you are obviously not a Christian, how would you know? You don't look up nothing or do the research, so how possibly would you know?

That's the ignorant and idiotic claim you made.. Then you said:

Call a Baptist Church, any Church with Baptist in the Name and ask them if Baptist and Catholics are both Christians and they will tell you no. But I know you won't because you only want to dictate your personal views and or opinions without proven facts.

That's the question. And I did call. Turns out that you were full of crap, as we already knew.

just because you are a liar

this violates the terms and conditions of imdb.com. IMDb doesn't allow people to attack others with hateful language. Imdb will delete your posts like that.

You lied. That makes you a liar. Is a statement of fact, not an unwarranted attack. So quit your whining and playing the victim card. I know is hard not to play victim since your used to it, is something that your particular christian ilk love to do. A real Christian, heck any reasonable adult, when presented with evidence would admit that they were in the wrong, apologize and move on. But not you. Your arrogance and obtuseness won't allow it. You really are not a very good Christian.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

TO PASTRAMI:

Today, July 11th, Monday morning, I called FBC in Pasadena, CA and spoke to Suzy Cronin. I asked her if she remembered a guy asking her if Catholics were the same as Christians? Suzy said

and I quote: yes, I remembered talking to him and I told him that Catholics and Christians believe in the same God but practices of each religion separates them. unquote.

Suzy was very serious, while she was explaining it to me. Did you notice how she said Catholics and Christians? Suzy explained it to me, the way I wanted to explain it to you. Therefore, this solves our discussion that Catholics and Christians practices are different and therefore, separates them, according to Suzy Cronin, of FBC in Pasadena, CA.

FBC in Pasadena, CA
open from 9-5pm
closed for lunch 12-1pm
626 793-7164
http://fbcpasadena.com/about-us/mission

God says "treat people the way, you want to be treated." Luke 6:31

[–] archer1812 8 years ago

Again, the point of discussion was whether Baptists believe that Catholics are or are not Christians. No one question that Baptists have different practices than Catholics. But that's not the point in discussion.

BTW, she said Catholics and Baptists (not Christians) believe in the same God. And she also said: of course we don't believe that they're not Christian. You're not telling the whole truth here. And that's a form of lying. Again.

You are such a perfect example of a legalist. One of the characteristics is this:

Having a sectarian attitude toward other Christians. People who don't understand God's grace believe they have a corner on truth, so they cannot accept the fact that the Holy Spirit might be moving in other denominations. Some churches even teach that they are the only people going to heaven. If your church believes they are the only true Christians, exit quickly. Legalism is toxic! Find a church that embraces the whole body of Christ.

That's you to a tee. A sad pathetic and terrible excuse for a Christian.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

To Pastrami:
Rephrase/edit:
The Catholic denomination was divided many years ago from the many other Christian denominations. Though, many Catholics are unaware of this. For example, First Baptist Church of Pasadena, CA said,

Quote: "We all believe in the same God, but different religious practices separates them." Unquote.

Everyone who hates his fellow Christian is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life residing in him. 1 John 3:15

Because you DON'T read Jesus' teachings, daily, I see NO reason to continue answering your harmful posts.

1 John 5:18
1 John 4:8
Matthew 15:11
Psalm 141:3
Psalm 39:1

[–] CosmopolitanHobo 8 years ago

Okay let's say for argument sake: that Catholics are Christians.

Why would you use a fact for 'arguments sake? That doesn't make any sense.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

Why would you use a fact for 'arguments sake? That doesn't make any sense.

You came into the middle to end of the conversion but thankfully, I have decided not to argue about it anymore but thanks for your positive input.

1 John 3:8

[–] archer1812 8 years ago

Okay let's say for argument sake: that Catholics are Christians.

There is no "for argument sake". It is a fact. One that you obtusely and ignorantly refuse to accept.

I see NO reason to continue this conversation with you because you don't read the New Testament, where Jesus' teachings are and therefore, you'll be demonstrating nothing but hate, evil and harm -things I can do without.

This is a coward's way out. Deep down you know that you are wrong, that you're full of it. So you do this passive aggressive excuse to try to make yourself look superior. But you know it's crap.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

To Pastrami/Archer:

These IMDb threads are for various viewpoints and they are meant to be fun. It's not for calling folks ugly names and making false and damaging statements about someone.

I have NOT called you ugly names. I have NOT made false and damaging statements. I have spoke from God's Scriptures. If you have a problem with that then you need to take it up with God, not me. I didn't write the Holy Scriptures, He did.

The one who does what is sinful (harm to others) is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil's work. 1 John 3:8

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

"...just because people believe in personal opinion, doesn't make it factual."

I totally agree with you on that. And that is why I'm rejecting so much of what you've posted.

The Bible disagrees with you on so many of these matters and you are pontificating on topics of which you have very limited knowledge. When you called Billy Graham a "respected evangelical scholar" I chuckled to myself because Billy NEVER made such a claim---and in a lifetime of ministry I've never known anyone within the evangelical academic world who has made such a claim. To his credit, when Billy needed a Biblical scholar for some project, he invited one to assist him and chose one of the very best. I recommend you read the late Carl F. H. Henry's auto-biography and you will learn more about their collaboration in the founding of CT magazine, for example.

Of course, when you denied the use of idioms in the Hebrew and Greek scriptures, you sounded more like some of the legalistic sects I've dealt with other the years.

No. The rapture is an event distinct from the Second Coming of Jesus Christ is NOT a belief of most Christians. Nowhere close. In fact, I can think of many top evangelical seminaries, not a single member of the New Testament Greek department is a pre-trib Dispensationalist. (Not every evangelical graduate school has the same doctrinal statement as Dallas Theological Seminary.)

You sound like a novice who knows little but thinks herself qualified to provide remedial tutoring of experience evangelical scholars.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] monstermaniac 9 years ago

"Christians are a separate faith than other denominations because faithful Christians live by the New Testament teachings, as best as they can (were not perfect, we will stumble sometimes)."

Not to be mocking, but as a non-believer it is quite humorous to witness theists of different beliefs butting heads. Theists all seem to agree on how atheists need to open their eyes to the truth of God but we're over here watching you all disagree constantly on doctrine and we can't help but think, you guys can't even all get together and decide unanimously what you're really even talking about. All you do is raise your hands and say, we've got the truth! No, we've got the truth! No, over here, follow us, we've got the truth! You might call other faiths misguided, they might call you misguided. I just go one step further and say I think you're all misguided.

"If so, the two of them, will not mix together well because science comes from man and the Bible comes from God."

Well, they could BOTH come from man. People were creating wild stories long before the Bible was written you know. If I point to any other "holy" text from any other faith around the world and find a few examples of accurate historical accounts, relevant moral lessons and a couple prophecies that seem to have come true, you will no doubt be quick on the trigger to proclaim, So what? None of that means it isn't boulder-dash manufactured in the minds of mere humans. Once again, as you would find as a common theme with non-believers, I just go one step further and say ALL holy books are likely creative fiction.

"I don't care about science or what mortal man says but I do care about God's words and instructions for everyone."

Here's the catch. What if there are no Gods sharing their words and instructions with us, and the only thing you follow are the musings of mere mortal, corruptible, fallible, limited men? Not only that, but men from a time when the only answer anyone could possibly give for just about anything was some sort of divine, mystical, hidden agency. You denounce science but likely have no quarrel with the scientific discovery long ago that lightning has it's origins purely in natural processes and not the god Thor. You likely go to the doctor when you get sick and do not simply pray for God to remove the demon from your body as was once the common belief before medical science opened so many doors for human health.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

Thank you for pointing that out to me. That is what happens when you get different Churches together. They all have certain beliefs. I wasn't always a faithful believer in Jesus. I started out as a Catholic (when I was 5 years old). I was aware of God's existence but I didn't know God's high standard ways. For instance, one of God's high standard ways: He considers lust, to be adultery. Matthew 5:28 My husband and I, started going to the Church of Christ in 1990 but we were not reading our bibles so we fell away from our faith. It's called "backsliding." In 2003, I started back reading my bible but my husband was not. Things got really bad and we split. Long story short, in 2008, we got back together again and we both started reading the New Testament or Jesus' teachings and after 6 months, we got closer than we ever have, in all 35 years together. Our marriage isn't perfect now but I am grateful to God that He's working in us so my husband and I, can love one another and stay together. For faithful Christians, we must keep to the teachings of Jesus (Matthew 1:18 through Jude) because people forget a lot. Through the Word of God, God keeps reminding us to be kind to one another and forgiving each other. Most people don't read the teachings of Jesus every day and that is why these angry folks judge others harshly with no understanding. An elderly Christian man told me once "You can tell a Christian by their love." In showing love, it doesn't mean you have to go around flattery people but to encourage one's faith in God. (1 Thessalonians 5:11) I notice that most people here read articles and writing on the internet instead of reading the bible, every day.

1 Corinthians 4:1

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

As to your denials of what I said about the pretribulational rapture being embraced by only a small percentage of Christians, ChristianityToday.com cites surveys which agree with me.

They cite a survey of Protestant ministers and found that only a minority (about 36%) held a Dispensational type of rapture view. So my citing previous surveys indicating about 8% OF ALL CHRISTIANS WORLDWIDE (rather than just American Protestant pastors) is entirely compatible with that.

So, anyone one looks at it, the view is held by a significant, yet small-percentage of all Christians world-wide.

[–] JediColt 9 years ago

You know, I think Science and the Bible mix together VERY well. I know many people disagree but the more I study the Bible the more it makes sense with what we know scientifically.

I think it helps to define science also. Science isn't man-made, science is the search for truth. Many times science doesn't even attempt to draw a conclusion, just gather facts and differentiate between what is known and what is unknown.

Doesn't mean science can't get it wrong, it certainly can and has, but that doesn't mean all science should be dismissed. I would be curious to know if you are an anti-vaxxer or believe the earth is flat or the moon landing was fake.

I've always found it ironic when people think science and God can't co-exist, because ultimately science IS God. Science is fact, truth, it answers the why and the how. That lines up perfectly with God.

[–] mustangguy809 9 years ago

Thank you and well-said.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

To Science-forum:

As a prisoner in the Lord, then, I urge you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling you have received: with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, and with diligence to preserve the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. Ephesians 4:1-3

There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.
Ephesians 4:4-6

Jesus replied, "Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born (spiritually) again." John 3:3

"Bear with each other and forgive one another if any of you has a grievance against someone. Forgive as the Lord forgave you." Colossians 3:13

"If you love those who love you, what reward will you get?..." Matthew 5:46

Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here!
2 Corinthians 5:17 You were taught, with regard to your former way of life, you lay aside your old self...Ephesians 4:22

Ephesians 4:31
1 John 4:20

[–] JediColt 9 years ago

You know, I have disagreed with almost everything you have posted in this thread A_CHOSEN_ONE, but this is a beautiful post. "Missing God's best for you" is so true, think of it like living in a house and never using the thermostat. God isn't punishing you when He makes it really hot or really cold, that is you rejecting something that is right there the whole time.That is God's love, right there for the taking.

I also recommend Matthew as the best place to start for new Bible readers.

If we disagree about scripture, we can discuss it in a loving and Christlike fashion, and if we still don't agree, we can go away and both pray that God will reveal the truth to us.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] JediColt 9 years ago

Nope, not familiar with Klove.

I do have the Bible Gateway app on my phone and will plug that in and listen. Honestly this is what I did to get through the book of Psalms when I was reading the Bible. They're meant to be listened to and not read anyway.

I really like All Sons and Daughters, they would probably be my favorite. Also David Crowder, Hillsong, and Charlie Hall.

Honestly there is some new stuff I've heard lately that I really like but I'm not even sure who the bands are.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

I do have the Bible Gateway app on my phone and will plug that in and listen.

http://www.klove.com/music/radio-stations/

http://www.klove.com/music/artists/chris-tomlin/songs/amazing-grace-(my-chains-are-gone)-lyrics.aspx - Link to Klove

I love this song by Chris Tomlin - Amazing Grace with a few changes from the original lyrics - very uplifting

I really like All Sons and Daughters, they would probably be my favorite. Also David Crowder, Hillsong, and Charlie Hall.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcnfT4arZtI - I love this song by Hillsong - it's my favorite song by them

God speed

One Nation Under God

[–] JediColt 9 years ago

I'm not familiar with Phil Wickham but this is one of my favorite songs and we play this one at our church a lot.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFRjr_x-yxU

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

They're meant to be listened to and not read anyway.

In Psalms, I have learned how to pray better. How to give God my anger because He understands.

Today, I read Psalms 70:

O God, hasten to deliver me;
O LORD, hasten to my help!
2 Let those be ashamed and humiliated
Who seek my life;
Let those be turned back and dishonored
Who delight in my hurt.

3 Let those be turned back because of their shame
Who say, “Aha, aha!”

4 Let all who seek You rejoice and be glad in You;
And let those who love Your salvation say continually,
“Let God be magnified.”

5 But I am afflicted and needy;
Hasten to me, O God!
You are my help and my deliverer;
O LORD, do not delay.

BEAUTIFUL words: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_MyC6kJzPg - Unfailing Love-

[–] JediColt 9 years ago

I used that "We see in a mirror darkly" passage the other day in talking to my kids about how we don't always know everything. How the church treated Copernicus and Galileo or how left handed people were thought to be evil or possessed by the devil.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] JediColt 9 years ago

I think of that same story from Luke 8 when people talk about mental illness, but probably in the exact opposite way. I think this was Jesus healing someone afflicted with a mental illness, and the story was told this way because the people at that time didn't know what mental illness was.

I absolutely believe in the power of prayer, but in no way do I dismiss mental illness as being demon possession. This sounds similar to the Christian Scientists who dismiss all healing and medicine in favor of prayer and let their children die of relatively minor illnesses.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] kurt-2000 9 years ago

I absolutely believe in the power of prayer, but in no way do I dismiss mental illness as being demon possession.

I personally believe that ghosts and demons do exist. I also believe that mental illness has to be dealt with on a scientific level, but science doesn't know everything yet.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

I personally believe that ghosts and demons do exist.

Yes, I agree.

One Nation Under God

[–] Digsys-Diner 9 years ago

but science doesn't know everything yet.

Because science is incapable of understanding certain aspects of our universe at this point in time, we should therefore substitute God as the answer until science is capable of answering?

Seems like your just wilfully letting science do everything it can, and than sitting back and throwing God into the spaces science hasn't touched. And by the way, science operates on a whole different realm than God..so if your going to claim that God is the answer for scientific questions, than you better how evidence and proof on a scientific level that God is the answer for these scientific claims.

Otherwise, we simply don't know the answer to these questions...and your God doesn't qualify as an official objective answer.

*I edit for grammar now.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

Mr. Digsys-Diner, I will have to get back to you since I have to take my husband to the Hospital because of his blood backing up into his stomach. (he has Cirrhosis of the Liver). Sorry....

One Nation Under God

[–] Digsys-Diner 9 years ago

Sorry to hear that. Hoping the best for your husband.
*I edit for grammar now.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

Thank you sir. I spoke to the nurse earlier, she says he's stable. The Doctors gave him meds to help stop the bleeding. The bleeding is coming from chronic esophagus varices. My husband was scheduled for an endoscopy procedure at 10:30 am, today. We been together for almost 35 years, and it's like we are a part of each other. We have been through some really bad times but some good ones, too. I read that varices can be life-threatening that I am very scared to lose him. All I have is my hope that God will allow my husband to live and grow older with me. He's 60 years old and I am 4 years younger than he is. He can be a big pain in the butt sometimes, but I see his good points, too. The Doctors were talking to him about a liver-transplant but there is a long waiting list for a liver. I understand you don't believe in God but in these frightening times, God is my only hope and comfort.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_MyC6kJzPg - Unfailing Love - He always makes time for me....

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

Sorry to hear that. Hoping the best for your husband.

Thanks, he's out of the Hospital now. Been in and out of the Hospital, lately. I have to spend a lot of time taking care of him. We are both retired (early because of our illnesses). It doesn't leave much time to answer. Digsys Diner, it's pretty simple to wrap this up: I have my faith in God. Faith is believing when you cannot see God. If you could see God, it wouldn't be faith. God freed me from the addictions of alcohol and smoking cigarettes. For years, I've been trying on my own to quit but I couldn't stop. When my father died, in April 2010, God comforted me and got me through it. Even today, God still comforts me because I was very close to my father and I still miss him, very much. I believe, that one day, I will be reunited with my father and see him again because my father was a believer, too. I believe that God will give me eternal life and a new body that will never decay or fail. Living in a paradise with God, without pain or sufferings, and living in this paradise forever and ever. I believe, that God provides for us very generously because He made that promise, according to the Scriptures and we've seen the proof in our lives, as believers (my husband and I). How can we go against God, when He takes care of us? I only know what we believe to be true, nothing else matters. We had it very bad, when we were non-believers. When we became believers of God, we had it very good. Currently, my husband has Cirrhosis of the Liver and Kidney problems because he made a lot of bad choices (in his past) and those bad choices have consequences. Those consequences, caught up to my husband but by the grace of God, God can work miracles for my husband. I asked everyone that I know, to pray for my husband and thank God, my husband is doing better. A couple of the Churches that my son and sister go to: put my husband, on their prayer list. I believe in the power of prayer. I believe, men and or Doctors will always fall short because they are simply mortals without the power that God possesses. I believe, when believers of God say: God named all the stars (billion) and knows them all by name. I hope you understand that I could never go against God because He is my Father in Heaven, who loves us so much, even when we don't deserve it. What man on earth would provide for us, do for us, in the same way? Men, surely couldn't perform miraculous miracles but God can. I understand that you are not a believer but I know you can understand too, why I could never go against God. Haven't you loved someone so much that you could never go against them? Perhaps, loving them so much that you make excuses for them, when they do something wrong? How could I go against God, when He is my bread and butter? God is my Protector. God is my everything. Without God, I am nothing, I have nothing. I'm keeping my mind on the grand prize: Life Eternal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9WEj6uLgmM - Live on Forever - lyrics is what I believe in too

One Nation Under God

[–] Digsys-Diner 9 years ago

Hey, im glad to hear that your husband is out of the hospital and doing better. I didnt realise you replied to my other post at the beginning of the month, so please dont think I was intentionally ignoring you. From what iv read in your posts, you seem to have a very personal relationship with who you claim to be God. This relationship has helped you through some very tough moments in you and your husbands life, although i think you are slightly failing to see the hard work that other humans are contributing to make life as enjoyable as possible. We live in a very special time in history, where we have the technology to save lives as well as the social awareness to be able to discuss ideas without consequences (obviously this is only true for certain parts of the world.) You said that,

believe, men and or Doctors will always fall short because they are simply mortals without the power that God possesses.

which i just don't find to be true. There are religious and non religious doctors, and i am sure both have a similar success rate. IF ANYTHING, and maybe research would back this up, doctors who believe in a higher power would be more likely to have an attitude of "well if God wants this person to live, than they will live", where a non believer doctor, might think that "this persons ONE life could be over if i don't act now". That to me is a main difference between believers and non believers, in that believers are looking forward to you next life, while non believers are trying to make the most out of this life.

It also seems to me that you conveniently allow God to be responsible for anything good (your husband recovering, your ability to quit your addictions etc) but you don't blame him for allowing those addictions to exist. Biblically, God is known as a deceiver who uses Satan as bait to tempt people who he wants to test the devotion of. Its a lot easier to say that my addictions were the cause of demons, and thus God helped me conquer those addictions than it is to say "i was weak and addicted to something, until i changed something in my life and kicked the habit." Essentially, i am saying that if your going to attribute God to helping people out in their day to day lives, than you also need to account for all the suffering, and why your deity is so selective when it comes to only helping people who can afford it.

Men, surely couldn't perform miraculous miracles but God can.

Also, im curious as to what miracles God has performed?

Miracle
a surprising and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore considered to be the work of a divine agency.

I know miracles of the NT are much different than the miracles you claim exist, but that doesn't change the fact that miracles are scientifically impossible. Everything has a natural explanation, even if it is sometimes easier to just label it as a "miracle" instead of digging into the root causes. Someone 2-300 years ago would see our society and think that our society is miracle, with planes, cars, electricity, tv's etc...however, there would still be a natural scientific explanation. So while it may seem that your husband had a miracle performed, i can assure you that the skill and knowledge of the doctors is what helped him in the ways that it did.

God is my Protector. God is my everything. Without God, I am nothing, I have nothing.

You really believe this? Do you not feel a stronger sense of community with your fellow humans, than with an invisible deity who completely ignores 99.9% of the world, while only focussing on the well of western nations? Is it because we believe in the right God, that he gives us special attention?

Anyways, hope all is well. Best wishes for you and your husband!

*I edit for grammar now.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

That is okay, I didn't think you were ignoring me. My ill husband has been a handful. I recently had time to post a few times. We keep to ourselves because of my husband's illnesses, so I don't get to talk to people, except for my son and my husband. Its nice to share our different viewpoints and making it fun and interesting. I try to avoid major arguments on my posts because stress makes my Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) act up (in pain to my joints). I'm sure you know what RA is but for those who read this post: RA is an overly-active immune system. The immune system attacks its own body's tissues, causing fingers and toes joints to bend and twist. About eight years ago, a RA Specialist told me that "stress" is the main cause of diseases. I was so stressed out, most of the time, when Doctors diagnosed me with RA. Sometimes, I think, maybe if I did this or that, I could have avoided this disease but its too late now, what's done, is done. The first few years, the Doctors gave me a couple of meds to help but after five years, they stop helping. Consequently, I dropped to my knees and prayed with all my heart, strength and mind. As a result, I started my own research on holistic herbs. Holistic herbs really work. Last year, I went to see a Specialist and he was amazed how my hands looked. The Doctor said "I'm surprised, your hands don't look worse, without medication." My miracle from God. Yes, I have always had a personal relationship with God since I was five years old. I think that I would have went insane if God wasn't in my life, to give me hope of something to look forward to (a second chance, in paradise with a new body that won't fail me). Your post was long but I read all of it. That is the first time that I ever read a long post. It kept me interested and you showed me respect, by NOT calling me names. Thanks for treating me decent. To answer your post: we have different points of views. I don't hate you for NOT believing in God. Do you hate me because I believe in God? Can we coexist with our different points of views about God?

One Nation Under God

[–] Digsys-Diner 9 years ago

I started my own research on holistic herbs. Holistic herbs really work.

Thats good that you found something which works for you. If you said your RA isa result of stress, than its totally understandable how holistic medicines could help reduce stress. You said that you asked God for a miracle, and the fact that you discovered holistic medicine was that miracle. It seems that your RA was fairly controllable, as long as your stress levels are controlled. Im not sure how well prescription medication works in a scenario like that, but i can think for various natural methods of reducing stress levels without any prescription drugs. If you were to claim this as a miracle, than i would have to think it would be similar to the story of Jesus healing a blind man. He didn't give the man glasses so that he could make the best of his blindness, he out right cured him of his blindness. THAT is a miracle, although i don't believe for a second ghat actually happened. Its not difficult unintentionally fabricate stories, 30-100 years after the death of the person. On that note, I'm still glad you found something that works for you.

I don't hate you for NOT believing in God. Do you hate me because I believe in God?

Not at all. We are all humans, with our individual personalities and interests and it would be incredibly rude for me to judge you based on one harmless belief. What i do hate, ate people who impose their "divine opinion" on others, and as a result, end up taking their lives. I look around the world, and i see innocent women, children, and men being imprisoned in a fundamentalist, backwards ideology which demonizes women, homosexuals, and other minorities; and sees death as a victory. Millions are losing their lives every day at the hands of these religious fanatics, and we (the west) refuse to condemn these beliefs because they ARE religious. To sum up, what i do hate are people who impose their religious beliefs on others and i hate how cowardice we've become in regards to defending free speech.

Can we coexist with our different points of views about God?

Of course. If we had different view points on the rights of certain humans, like women not having rights, homosexuals deserving death etc.. Than i do not think we could coexist. As long as you have the same respect for human life that i do, than yes we can coexist.

*I edit for grammar now.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

The last few days have been so very busy for me. It's 12:21 am ...fixin to go to sleep but I wanted to respond to your post before the time gets away from me.

It's weird how some people that aren't' saved: are nice And some people that are supposed to be saved: are mean and rude. *

It's weird how some people that aren't saved: help you out And some people that are supposed to be saved: don't help you out.

Like: one of my sisters likes to help me (she isn't saved), then, I have another sister who doesn't help me at all (she is saved). *
Both my sisters have great incomes and their kids are all grown up and live on their own. I have always thought that it would have been the Christian sister to help out and not the Non-Christian helping out more.

One particular Church I attended (when I was 13 years old) taught me that God judges people by their hearts.

You mention many problems in the world. Years ago, when I watched regular television: I heard on the news about a parent (father) who beat his baby and killed it because the baby wouldn't stop crying during the football game.

Another news story: a parent (mother) took her two small children into her car and drove the car into a river. She ended up drowning her own kids, to get the insurance money. Later, the insurance found out that there was foul play and the mother got nothing. I am sure she was charged for killing her two children.

I quit listening/watching to the news because I couldn't do anything about it and the world is only going to get worse, as the years go on. Some believers, believe that all these hard times, have to happen before the end comes. I believe in my heart, that one day, God is going to destroy all the wickedness in the world but in His timing.

same respect

Yes, I agree.

One Nation Under God

[–] Digsys-Diner 9 years ago

Both my sisters have great incomes and their kids are all grown up and live on their own. I have always thought that it would have been the Christian sister to help out and not the Non-Christian helping out more.

This is an old argument used bY the religious, which i could never buy into. They claim that they are "better" people because they know God, and have accepted Jesus, and thus have a better grasp on their "morals". This is clearly not true, simply by the amount of horrendous crimes committed at the hands of devout believers. If believers really had some kind of monopoly on morality, than there just wouldn't be the amount of crimes suggesting the opposite.

We get our morality from our environment, it is not innate in us, and it does not come once we "accept jesus". Morality is formed over years of positive or negative environmental and societal factors. If you are raised believing that everything you do is moral, because Jesus instilled morality in you; than its clear that that person doesn't understand reality. Your other sister, gets her morality from interacting with other people. She sees that the most positivity comes when you actually help someone, rather than just praying for them. Granted, iv met a lot of great believers, with great hearts; but that doesn't change the fact that they are acting that way in accordance with Gods will, where non believers act the way they do simply because they see the affect their actions have in the real world. I could be over simplifying it, but thats how i see morality when it comes to believers and non believers.

taught me that God judges people by their hearts

If God exists, id hope so. Nothing in our hundreds of years of scientific research, suggests that there is anything natural or material about a divine being. This is enough for me not to believe in such a being, although i still try to live my life as positively as possible. If i die and get to heaven, and Yahweh banishes me to hell for simply being rational and looking at the evidence, than i guess heaven just isn't the place for me.

I quit listening/watching to the news because I couldn't do anything about it and the world is only going to get worse, as the years go on.

I don't watch the news either. Sure those are two horrific stories, which im sure drew a lot of viewers, but they are not news. They are simply controversial stories which gained large audiences.

God is going to destroy all the wickedness in the world but in His timing.

That would be nice.

*I edit for grammar now.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

where non believers act the way they do simply because they see the affect their actions have in the real world.

Oops, I forgot to tell you that my older sister (non-Christian) is a Catholic. Some IMDb folks and some modern definitions believe that Catholics and Christians are the same but they are not. What makes them different? Their beliefs and their way of life, according to their faith. For example: some Christians use foul language, where other Christians do not. Like my brother in law, he curses loosely and says "that is why Jesus died for my sins." I, on the other hand, believe that we should not use curse words. However, if someone hit my RA hand and I let a cuss word slip then that would be a stumble but not intentional. I believe there are many Christians (like me) that believe that Jesus died for our stumble (unintentional) sins.
Another example of different beliefs: some Christians believe its okay to gamble. Other Christians believe gambling is evil. Not common, there are a couple of Churches that have a dress code (no tight skirts/dresses) and the other Church (women wear those bonnets and dresses are long and have long sleeves). I have lived in Arkansas, Tennessee, Ohio, Texas, and I'm from Northern California (born and raised) so I've seen a lot of denominations. I like the Amish, they wear the black suits and hats with long beards. They also ride in carriages which is pretty neat to see. We went to one of their produce markets in Tennessee. They are kind to everyone.

looking at the evidence

Faith is believing when there is no evidence. If there were evidence: it wouldn't be faith.

I have always thought that it would have been the Christian sister to help out and not the Non-Christian helping out more.

Knowing that my helpful sister is a Catholic. Would your answer be the same? Perhaps, the Christian sister is afraid she won't have enough to survive? Although, fifteen years ago, I saw a bank statement she left on the counter and she had $50,000 dollars in the bank. Most Christians believe the scripture that God promises to provide for His people, so maybe the Christian sister doesn't have enough faith? Most Christians should know that we are rewarded for our good works. Romans 2:6
God says: "In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead." James 2:17
Then again, I think I may have influenced my older sister (the Catholic) over the years. We talk more often. The other sister (Christian), we talk every blue moon because she has her own clique of friends.

Thanks for your post. :-)

One Nation Under God

[–] Digsys-Diner 9 years ago

Their beliefs and their way of life, according to their faith.

I'm still having a hard time understanding the difference, mainly because you didn't really explain the Catholics position on any of those things. It's seems that there are a few main differences, such as adherence to the pope, baptismal rules, and other interpretations to Biblical scripture.
http://www.enkivillage.com/the-difference-between-catholic-and-christian.html
Christians overall seem to be more casual with their religion where Catholics are certainly much more strict.

I like the Amish

Their men are incredibly efficient at building a house or farm.

Faith is believing when there is no evidence. If there were evidence: it wouldn't be faith.

That could be applied to anything. If I said I wanted to believe that unicorns exist, but are invisible; you wouldn't believe me. And I'd just say "take it on faith", you still wouldn't believe me. I think faith can be applied to situations, using probability. For example, i have a couple of good friends who I can rely on. I have faith that they would look out for me in a bad situation. That's not based off zero evidence though, because we have existing an relationship. To apply the same context of faith to belief in a deity isn't appropriate, because there is no pre existing relationship to base your "faith" off.

I believed up until I was 17, and it's never been even remotely convincing to me since.

Knowing that my helpful sister is a Catholic. Would your answer be the same?

I think so. I know good people exist all throughout the world; regardless of their belief system. This however, doesn't change the fact that people's beliefs do affect their behaviour.

so maybe the Christian sister doesn't have enough faith?

I don't think that is the issue at all. I think your sisters, as well as everyone, shouldn't worry about anything else besides number 1: yourself and number 2: those around you. Worrying about whether or not you believe enough in something that, in my opinion, doesn't exist; is meaningless. We have people around us who need to be affected by our actions in a positive way, and praying, in my opinion, isn't helpful. It may be for you, but there's no correlation to real world events.

That aside, I have to say it's been a sad day; which is treally effecting me, due to the fact that a Muslim man went into a gay bar in Florida and shot over 100 people. People will go ahead and deny that there is any correlation between his Islamic beliefs and his violent actions. As well, a young singer who I used to watch on YouTube when I was younger; Christian Grimmie was killed. She was shot after a concert. It's heartbreaking because of her potential, and another loss of an amazing person at the hands of gun wielding psychopath. I wonder where the issue lies.

http://youtu.be/OA4fdiOqNMw

*I edit for grammar now.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

Christians overall seem to be more casual with their religion where Catholics are certainly much more strict.

Yes, you are right, I should have gone into more detail. I thought about it after I responded to your post.

I was baptized as a baby, as a Catholic. My parents were both Catholics so all my sisters and me were baptized and raised Catholics until we became adults and we went our separate beliefs and denominations. I believe my oldest sister is the only one that is a Catholic, to this day, but she is not active.

Not-active is when you do not go to Church on Lent, Ash Wednesday, Palm Sunday, Easter Sunday, Christmas Day, or every Sunday but they tell everyone that they are Catholics.

Active is when you go to Church every Sunday and you follow Catholic's traditions (for Lent: active Catholics don't eat meat from Ash Wednesday through Easter Sunday. Some Catholics will give something up (either something they like to do or eat or drink) through this time frame.

On the contrary, I believe Catholics are more relax than (let's say) First Baptist Church. I can't speak for all Baptist since they are broken up into different denominations/beliefs. I can only speak from my experience and people I have been around. For instance, most Catholics I know (relatives and acquaintances) drink alcohol, Vs the First Baptist members don't drink alcohol. Catholic Churches have statues of saints and a cross with Jesus on it, Vs the First Baptist Church does not have statues or a Jesus on the Cross at their Church. The folks in a Catholic Church call the Priest: Father, Vs to the First Baptist Church don't call anyone "Father" unless they are referring to a youth's parent. Catholics have sacraments that children go through as members of the Parish. The ones I remember: Baptism, Holy Communion, Confirmation, and Marriage. Although, decades have passed since I made my first holy communion (receiving that small white piece of unleavened bread) so there may be more but I do not remember the other three sacraments that I read on the internet. Among my uncles and aunt and their children, a whole lot of swearing going on, Vs First Baptist folks I knew, didn't use swear words, at all. Most of my Catholic relatives and acquaintances did whatever they wanted (cheating for one example) without regard to Jesus' teachings (mainly because they don't read the Bible), Vs First Baptist members are encouraged to read their bibles and be accountable to God.

With this information: which one sounds more relaxed? Which one sounds more strict?

If the Lord wills, and I am among the living, I will get back to you on the rest of your post since it is 11:27 am and have to get some chores done.

One Nation Under God

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzseOqwn8oo - Grimmie sings my favorite song and she says its her favorite song too.

I first heard it from:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjR_A2pGPrY - My Favorite Song -

I believe, Jesus took Grimmie home to be with Him and she is in a better place...she will be missed.

One Nation Under God

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

I'm still having a hard time understanding the difference, mainly because you didn't really explain the Catholics position on any of those things.

I'm sorry I didn't answer you accurately. Let me clarify your question: what is the difference between Catholics and Christians?

Their men are incredibly efficient at building a house or farm.

I've seen the Amish in Etowah, Tennessee. What State did you see the Amish people?

The produce market place was a outside store but it looked built okay to me. :-)

I believed up until I was 17, and it's never been even remotely convincing to me since

Perhaps that is why you possess a kindness quality that stayed with you, even past the age of 17 years old. Where others that are supposed to be Christians are quick to anger. I try to remember to judge myself first and then say to others like me that they are going against the teachings of Jesus by not forgiving.... (no second chances with them).

I've had many convincing moments for me: all my prayers were answered. Times where i could not be successful in tasks that I was doing. I ask Jesus to help and there He was for me - working on my behalf.

For example: we were selling a year old (Hybrid) car to my brother in law and he agreed to take over the car payments and if he failed to make a payment, we could take the car back. My brother in law was always late making the payments and he would lie why it was late. After ten months, no payment was going to be made so we went to pick the car up and my brother in law hid the car from us. Both my husband and I, prayed that God would make the car breakdown so his brother would give up the car and a couple of weeks later, the car broke down. Thank God because the car was not paid off. We still owed $6,500 and we had to pay another $1,500 to get the car fix so we could sell it to Carmax for $5,000. A lesson learned "don't do business with family" because they take advantage...

The point of the story, God does answer prayers....this is just one example but I have many more examples.

I don't think that is the issue at all. I think your sisters, as well as everyone, shouldn't worry about anything else besides number 1: yourself

That is how I see the world and its problems. There is nothing I can do so I try not to think about it because there are over a billion (rough guess) people in the world. Additionally, I don't know how all people live, perhaps they are wicked people or worshipping other (false) Gods and that is why God won't help them. I used to be wicked (after I left home at 15 1/2 years old) and God didn't help me (for the most part). Things in my life didn't get better (job, residence, money, marriage, etc) until I came back to the Lord (God lavished us with gifts).

Muslim man went into a gay bar in Florida and shot over 100 people.

A few months back, I heard of another muslim man who shot several people in a building, where he used to work. I believe, these muslim men are taking vengeance into their own hands and they shouldn't be. Perhaps to these muslim men, they are so ill of seeing events that they cannot take anymore. There are times when I see things in the world that makes me incredibly upset but I have to keep my mind on the Lord or it'll drive me crazy or make me more sick than I already am. I do not approve of what people do/did but I believe, ALL will answer to Jesus for what they did, on Judgment Day.

Romans 12:19

[–] CosmopolitanHobo 9 years ago

Both my husband and I, prayed that God would make the car breakdown so his brother would give up the car and a couple of weeks later, the car broke down.

Maybe he didn't make the payments because you sold him a clapped out old banger and he didn't think it was worth it?

Also, how very petty of God to answer your prayer to make a car break down whilst ignoring all those who have prayed for an end to cancer in children. In fact, how very petty of you to pray for such a thing, very Christian indeed!

[–] kurt-2000 9 years ago

clapped out old banger

potty mouth....

Also, how very petty of God to answer your prayer to make a car break down whilst ignoring all those who have prayed for an end to cancer in children. In fact, how very petty of you to pray for such a thing, very Christian indeed!

Attacking another Christian I see.

nice...

And you don't enjoy the entertainment of ridiculing on chat boards?

Truth again exposed....you're busted.

Cleared up that debate nicely.

[–] Digsys-Diner 9 years ago

Cosmos response was well needed considering the absurdness of the proposition,

Both my husband and I, prayed that God would make the car breakdown so his brother would give up the car and a couple of weeks later, the car broke down.

So you'd rather defend this statement, rather than point out the absurdity of it? That is your problem right there Kurt, you are more concerned with defending ideas like this, rather than ridiculing them to highlight the absurdity. You're the reason people think they can just believe whatever they want.

*I edit for grammar now.

[–] CosmopolitanHobo 9 years ago

potty mouth....

If you don't understand what the words mean in that sequence, and your response strongly suggests that you don't, then it's best to keep quiet.

Attacking another Christian I see.

Go on then kurt, defender of all Christians everywhere despite neither being a Christian nor advocating religion (that kind of means you think of Christianity as a cult you know, do you realise that?), please defend the original statement. What exactly do you consider right, proper and particularly Christian about them praying to God, who according to you doesn't answer prayers except when he/she/it does, for something bad to happen to someone rather than asking your god of choice to benefit humanity in some way? Or even just asking God to better the individual in some way for that matter so that he pays what he owes? I'll wait for your answer.

[–] kurt-2000 9 years ago

If you don't understand what the words mean in that sequence, and your response strongly suggests that you don't, then it's best to keep quiet.

it's called sarcasm. I'll red flag you next time.

(that kind of means you think of Christianity as a cult you know, do you realise that?),

Christianity isn't a cult, but there are some cults proclaiming to be Christian. I've helped you before on this Cosmo.

defender of all Christians everywhere despite neither being a Christian

I've defending atheists on many occasions, and I'm certainly not an atheist, so your assumption is incorrect again.

Also, how very petty of God to answer your prayer to make a car break down whilst ignoring all those who have prayed for an end to cancer in children. In fact, how very petty of you to pray for such a thing, very Christian indeed!

This was a particularly bigoted comment Cosmo. Many souls do return to Heaven before reaching retirement age, but you're assuming that's a bad thing.

Bigoted and assumptive. You have a two part problem Cosmo.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

To Digsys-Diner:

I read the link you provided on Saturday, it was very informative. Raised as a Catholic as a child, some of the stuff I read on that article, I didn't know so thank you.

This is what I was trying to explain to a guy, who is a Catholic:

For many, Catholicism and Christianity are one and the same, but they are quite different.

I like this part especially because it explains it perfectly:

the difference between Catholic and Christian comes with different interpretations of what the Bible teaches us.

Here is where Christians differ a lot from Catholics:

Origin

Catholics also follow papal (relating to the pope) law, believing that God speaks through the pope on matters of dogma (the pope's beliefs)

From what I was taught from a Pastor of First Baptist Church: God speaks to all of His children, through the Holy Spirit.

Beliefs

Where Christianity encompasses all churches and sects, Catholics believe that the Roman Catholic Church is the supreme authority on Earth

This was the first time I heard this.

Catholics have long standing traditions that include preservation of an all-male priesthood, monks and nuns that date back centuries, while many other Christian denominations follow different, and in some cases, more modern traditions, including female and/or married ministers.

I don't agree with the Catholic belief that a priest cannot get marry. I would think that most men have sxl appetites and if those appetites are not met, they could hurt someone (like children in the parish). Compared to Pastors and Ministers, they all can get married.

Salvation

Catholics are baptized after birth while many Christians can be baptized at any time after you have attained a belief and faith in Christ.

I am neutral on the baptizing part. Although, I can see the point of Christians: letting individuals make their own minds up of accepting Christ and His teachings. On the other hand, all children don't know what is good for them so parents have to guide their children. Most Christians believe that when a person is born: they are born with Adam and Eve's sin. So every child that is born, will want to do evil (some worse than others) and parents have to teach them to be good. Discipling is part of it. I'm not talking about beating the child (leaving bruises) but a standard spanking on the butt is sufficient. Proverbs 23:13 That is how my parents raised us. Only problem with disciplining your children, you have to give them love, too. Like hugs and lots of encouragement...this is where my parents and so many parents go wrong.

The Bible

The Holy Bible is believed by all Christians.

However, many (not all) Christians today aren't believing God's words, like they used to. Many have turned away from the Words of God and say stuff like: "God was using a phrase and He didn't mean it like that." Changing God's words because they did NOT accept (understand) His words. My brother-in-law said he read an article where the Pope told all the Priests: to tell all Catholic Church members, NOT to read the bible.

Hierarchy

The Roman Catholic Church is built on the belief that Jesus established His church with Peter as its head and every pope since is a successor to Peter.

Every pope since is a successor (next-in-line) to Peter? I guess, if you are a Catholic, you would go along with this.

Worship and Practices

Sunday is generally the day for most Christians to gather for communal worship because it is the day God rested.
"By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work."
Genesis 2:2

What is the first day of the week? Sunday, right? I believe with many folks that God started working on the first day of the week. He worked for six days, the last day of the week - Saturday - He rested. I believe with many, that Saturday is the Sabbath, a day of rest. Why do most Churches have their sermons on Sundays? Tradition, I guess.

Views on Homosexuality

Many congregations are not only open and accepting of homosexuals in their communities and worship services; some have accepted openly-gay ministers. The Roman Catholic Church still teaches that homosexuality is a sin, going against God and nature and homosexual priests have been censured. Many individual Catholics have different beliefs about homosexuality, however, in their personal lives.

If my sister hasn't changed Churches, she attends "Assembly of God" Church. Last year, my sister told me that she helped a few of her homosexual friends (by telling them the good news of Jesus), and they have been converted to her Church. The way I see it, however people choose to live their lives: that is between them and God, it's none of my business. One of my old friends (before I was saved) had a sister who was gay, after speaking to her partner, I realized that they had the same problems (like cheating on one another), like straight people do.

As far as the Catholic beliefs about homosexuality: the Pope, Cardinals, Archbishops, Bishops, and priests -they may still hold on to being against homosexuality but many strict Christians (not mention in this article) are against homosexuality, too.

How Did the Difference Between Catholics and Christian Emerge (separate)?

However, the beliefs of Catholics and Christians start to differ on other matters and have divided Christians into many different denominations, with Catholicism being the largest one. Catholics are a sect (a group of people with different religious beliefs) of Christianity led by the pope in Rome and following the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church.

Consequently, if the pope instructed the priests to tell their Church members not to read their bibles: basically, the Catholic members are leading themselves because most Catholics, don't go to Church and hear the sermon (mass). According to the article, the Catholic Church is the largest, sixty percent (out of 100%), I believe it. Other than the homosexual restriction, the Catholic Church atmosphere is very relaxed. I attended several Catholic Churches, and the members do NOT go out of their way to greet you. Everyone goes their own way, after the services are over. No one visits you, afterwards (many like this, because they don't want to be bother.) When I went to a Catholic School/Church, there wasn't any recreation (where the youths get together and go to the Youth Pastor's house and play board games or other fun activities), only the Catholic Church's fundraising booths which is now required for parents/students to do if they attend a Catholic School (in most Catholic Schools) and the tuition is very high ($328.00 per month, for one child) in private schools. My parents got a discount for all us kids but not sure how much.

I'm sorry it took me so long to reply on this article. Please excuse my grammar errors, I didn't have time to edit. Thx.

[–] Digsys-Diner 9 years ago

Many souls do return to Heaven before reaching retirement age

I love how you say this like its fact

*I edit for grammar now.

[–] CosmopolitanHobo 9 years ago

it's called sarcasm. I'll red flag you next time.

Perhaps if you didn't so liberally misuse "LOL" when it's not always appropriate people might be able to figure out when you are or aren't being sarcastic or trying to be funny. Just a thought.

I've helped you before on this Cosmo.

Indeed, and we reached the conclusion that Christianity isn't a cult because of its age, size and acceptability within the world, much like Jehovah's Witnesses despite your militant stance against them and religion in general.

I've defending atheists on many occasions

Perhaps you could delve into your own comment history this time round, and leave mine alone for a bit, and provide some evidence of this because I've never seen it. In fact I've seen, been on the receiving end of in fact, you 'attacking' (and I use that word loosely) atheists all to defend fundamentalists who hate you as much as you hate atheists.

your assumption

What assumption?

This was a particularly bigoted comment Cosmo.

Only to the easily (or faux) offended. What do you consider bigoted about preferring to see children not get cancer over hoping someone suffer the problems of having their car break down?

Many souls do return to Heaven before reaching retirement age, but you're assuming that's a bad thing.

Can't wait to see your evidence for this. And I still haven't made any assumptions, unlike yourself.

Anyway, feel free to ignore all that because I'd just like to see your defence over the original comment that I responded to, particularly the part about it being petty.

[–] kurt-2000 9 years ago

I love how you say this like its fact

It's a fact to people who believe in God.

But it's a myth to sniveling atheists who'll be begging for God's forgiveness on their death beds.

[–] Digsys-Diner 9 years ago

It's a fact to people who believe in God.

Just like its a fact that the world is flat to those who believe it is. Believe whatever you want kurt, but just know that there is no physical evidence supporting the validity of your beliefs.

it's a myth to sniveling atheists who'll be begging for God's forgiveness on their death beds.

Begging for Gods forgiveness? Ill need to apologize for using the brain that your god gave me? Oh right, i didn't use the brain he gave me the way he wanted me too. I guess i can see why that sort of crime deserves eternal punishment and torture. Thanks for the heads up Kurt.

*I edit for grammar now.

[–] kurt-2000 9 years ago

Believe whatever you want kurt, but just know that there is no physical evidence supporting the validity of your beliefs.

Actually, the answer to that issue is resolved after death.

Ill need to apologize for using the brain that your god gave me? Oh right, i didn't use the brain he gave me the way he wanted me too. I guess i can see why that sort of crime deserves eternal punishment and torture. Thanks for the heads up Kurt.

Believing in God isn't required, and you can reject an invitation to Heaven. So why the long face Digs?

[–] kurt-2000 9 years ago

Perhaps if you didn't so liberally misuse "LOL" when it's not always appropriate people might be able to figure out when you are or aren't being sarcastic or trying to be funny. Just a thought.

No. You'll remain clueless no matter what.

Indeed, and we reached the conclusion that Christianity isn't a cult because of its age, size and acceptability within the world,

Define "we". You and the other militant atheists protesting on three different boards, and railing against religion? Should I list all three boards you're mouthing off on this week?

much like Jehovah's Witnesses despite your militant stance against them and religion in general.

I never stated that I hated J.W. I stated that some of their tactics, membership demands and core beliefs are very controversial and similar to strategies used by cults. But it's a denomination that can be put back on track again.

I don't have a militant stance on religion in general either. I've stated that I don't defend the Christian label because of the extreme passive 'Christ mimic demands' that go with it. And while I reject big money exploitation from mega churches, I don't condemn all organized religion with contempt. Some denominations are doing very well.

Perhaps you could delve into your own comment history this time round, and leave mine alone for a bit, and provide some evidence of this because I've never seen it.

I even defended you on two occasions, and should I be surprised that you forgot.

to defend fundamentalists who hate you as much as you hate atheists.

I don't recall defending fundamentalists, unless there was an occasion where you flew off the handle. The last two fundamentalists I chatted with didn't get along with me very well. That was their mistake - not mine.

What assumption?

That you're a patient in the U.K. funny farm, or was there another assumption?

What do you consider bigoted about preferring to see children not get cancer over hoping someone suffer the problems of having their car break down?

So you're assumption is that a real God would never let people suffer. Maybe the suffering is part of the evil environment you created.

Can't wait to see your evidence for this.

Again...you found the belief that souls going to Heaven as factually incorrect, since atheists have all the facts, and are all knowing of the universe. got it....

And I still haven't made any assumptions, unlike yourself.

Your assumption, is that if God isn't willing to stand before you on command then he doesn't exist. Send me a board comment post after you die, confirming there is no Heaven. Or would that conflict with your proven fact assumption that there's nothingness after death, and thus no keyboard for you to access.

And speaking of children getting cancer, what will happen when Cosmo hobo gets cancer, which could happen? Will you be a sniveling atheist like so many others and beg for God's forgiveness?

[–] CosmopolitanHobo 9 years ago

No. You'll remain clueless no matter what.

"Lalala, can't hear you!"

Define "we".

I, CosmopolitanHobo and you, kurt-2000.

Should I list all three boards you're mouthing off on this week?

Please do. And I am curious as to what part of me saying how I enjoy French films, despite not liking the language, qualifies as "mouthing off".

I never stated that I hated J.W

Not something I accused you of so I don't know why you've said this.

I stated that some of their tactics, membership demands and core beliefs are very controversial and similar to strategies used by cults.

And there we have it, you have issues with JW's, many atheists have issues with the practices of most religions. What's the differences? Also, I'm quite curious as to what non-Christian religions you're willing to speak ill of.

I don't have a militant stance on religion in general either. I've stated that I don't defend the Christian label because of the extreme passive 'Christ mimic demands' that go with it. And while I reject big money exploitation from mega churches, I don't condemn all organized religion with contempt.

The part in bold was added sometime after the fact, as an act of defending your initial comment, so I don't buy it. What you said was that you don't advocate religion. There was no qualifier on it at all. It's also something that is far more anti-religious than anything I've ever said so by your own logic you must be militant.

I even defended you on two occasions, and should I be surprised that you forgot.

That's not how you provide evidence.

I don't recall defending fundamentalists

At one point I'd said something to Navaros, and you jumped in to try and start a fight with me over it (if I ever remember which thread it was I'll post a link), essentially defending him. As I recall you'd returned from a brief hiatus then as well. Perhaps you just have a habit of coming back from some time away and rushing to the aid of fundamentalists.

The last two fundamentalists I chatted with didn't get along with me very well. That was their mistake - not mine.

Given your recent admission about how fond you are of guns, saying that it was "their mistake" conjures some worrying thoughts! More seriously though, why was it their mistake? And do you think they didn't get along with you because you were masquerading as a Christian, or was it after your reveal that you don't advocate Christianity?

That you're a patient in the U.K. funny farm, or was there another assumption?

... Nope, doesn't make any sense.

So you're assumption is that a real God would never let people suffer.

So you're making assumptions about my assumptions that I never made? Is that supposed to be meta or something?

Maybe the suffering is part of the evil environment you created.

I've not created anything kurt, because I'm not a deity. Shocking revelation I know.

Again...you found the belief that souls going to Heaven as factually incorrect, since atheists have all the facts, and are all knowing of the universe. got it....

That's a rather long winded way of not providing any evidence.

Your assumption, is that if God isn't willing to stand before you on command then he doesn't exist.

Nope. I've seen you use this with Film quite a lot too. Your assumption is that atheists think like this, but it would appear that very few actually do.

Send me a board comment post after you die, confirming there is no Heaven.

You've used this sort of nonsense quite a lot too. Do you genuinely think that dead people, even assuming you were right about the afterlife, have the ability to communicate via the internet? Look, kurt, if you're getting emails from dead people then someone is trolling you I'm afraid, and successfully too if you're falling for it.

Or would that conflict with your proven fact assumption that there's nothingness after death, and thus no keyboard for you to access.

Best get digging in your favourite place (my history) to find one single instance of me stating this as a fact. Hint: you won't
Seriously, do you think Heaven and Hell have a really top notch wifi provider and can communicate with Earth via the internet?

And speaking of children getting cancer, what will happen when Cosmo hobo gets cancer, which could happen? Will you be a sniveling atheist like so many others and beg for God's forgiveness?

You are a truly unpleasant individual at times kurt.
As a serious response, not that it remotely deserves one, I'd look towards humanity for a cure, rather than pray to a being that has no interest in making itself known, nor any interest in responding to prayers according to you. And I certainly wouldn't beg forgiveness from the all powerful being that gave me cancer in the first place. Some of us aren't fearful of death because we never bought into the thought of spending eternity being punished for no logical or moral reason. Hell may be a concern to you, and if it's real it really should be, but it's no more a concern to me than ending up in Mordor after death.

[–] kurt-2000 9 years ago

I, CosmopolitanHobo and you, kurt-2000.

Wrong again

Should I list all three boards you're mouthing off on this week?

Please do. And I am curious as to what part of me saying how I enjoy French films, despite not liking the language, qualifies as "mouthing off".

Clearly...you're drunk.

I'll come back later.

geez 

[–] kurt-2000 9 years ago

At one point I'd said something to Navaros, and you jumped in to try and start a fight with me over it (if I ever remember which thread it was I'll post a link), essentially defending him.

Noooo....not defending him, but instead, simply correcting you and your false assumptions.

Given your recent admission about how fond you are of guns, saying that it was "their mistake" conjures some worrying thoughts! More seriously though, why was it their mistake? And do you think they didn't get along with you because you were masquerading as a Christian, or was it after your reveal that you don't advocate Christianity?

Is this you, putting on a little anti-gun protest, Cosmo? And as I recall, I stated that I owned guns - not in love with guns. And no, I haven't shot anyone, nor do I plan to. lol oh funny. Yeah, I'm going hunt'in in 'merica with the Duck Dynasty boys.

Seriously, do you think Heaven and Hell have a really top notch wifi provider and can communicate with Earth via the internet?

No...I figure that your atheist soul might be trapped on Earth, and if so, see if your ghost can type. Assuming you don't have other arrangements.

Hell may be a concern to you, and if it's real it really should be, but it's no more a concern to me than ending up in Mordor after death.

Thank you for that confession. My work is done for the week. lol

[–] Digsys-Diner 9 years ago

the answer to that issue is resolved after death.

Ah thats convenient, the evidence can only be seen once your dead.

you can reject an invitation to Heaven.

Not believing in God is a rejection of my invitation to heaven? That must mean not believing in leprechauns is also a rejection of the possibility that i could get some of their gold.

If i received an invitation to heaven, from God, than this would be a different situation. I have received no invitation though, so i guess i was never invited. Id say its because God would only want compliant sheep in heaven and not someone who'd question the status quo.

*I edit for grammar now.

[–] CosmopolitanHobo 9 years ago

Wrong again

Did I get your username wrong, were you still kurtbrian back then?

Clearly...you're drunk.

I'll come back later.

geez

What are you on about? You said you would list all 3 boards I've been "mouthing off on this week", so that'd be GND, GND2 and Film General that I've posted on, not mouthed off on. I do find it amusing that you'd accuse me of being evasive when there was nothing specifically to reply to, yet here you are once again not doing something you've claimed you would, and were in fact asked, to do. Do you know what hypocrite means? I was going to ask if you know what self awareness is but I already know you don't.

[–] CosmopolitanHobo 9 years ago

Noooo....not defending him, but instead, simply correcting you and your false assumptions.

 If nothing else, you do provide some amusement to me kurt.

And as I recall, I stated that I owned guns - not in love with guns.

And as I recall you started going on about how much better and safer America is because of guns, and that those of us in the UK should be worried about not owning guns. But no, it was wasn't any sort of protest, it was a tongue in cheek comment, as was made clear.

As I previously asked regarding the other fundamentalists feeling towards you, do you think they didn't get along with you because you were masquerading as a Christian? Please stop being evasive over this kurt, I know you don't like it.

No...I figure that your atheist soul might be trapped on Earth, and if so, see if your ghost can type.

So you think that all ghost can send emails to Earth, not just those in heaven or Hell?

Thank you for that confession.

How is something I've always said, sans the part about Mordor, a confession under any definition of the word?

My work is done for the week.

So your work for the week was getting all giddy over the thought of a British atheist, your two least favourite things, getting cancer and receiving a reply about not believing in the afterlife? Sounds about right.

[–] kurt-2000 9 years ago

Do you know what hypocrite means?

It means Cosmo is hung over from drinking a few too many pints.

" I was going to ask if you know what self awareness is but I already know you don't." - Cosmo hobo

[–] CosmopolitanHobo 9 years ago

It means Cosmo is hung over from drinking a few too many pints.

Seriously, you are allowed to just say "no, I don't know" sometimes.

" I was going to ask if you know what self awareness is but I already know you don't." - Cosmo hobo

And I stand by that comment.

[–] kurt-2000 9 years ago

If nothing else, you do provide some amusement to me kurt.

Save those laughs for your judgement day. You'll need the humor at that point.

And as I recall you started going on about how much better and safer America is because of guns

You got me confused with one of the other gun owners you bark at daily. I simply stated that I own guns. I didn't suggest it made the nation safer. But it's ironic that in a Florida gay bar not one customer had a pistol. Would you have wanted a pistol if you were in that bar, Cosmo? Or would you have been happy laying on the stale floors waiting to be slaughtered. It does bring up (more?) "amusement" discussion, as Cosmo likes to say. Lets see if you've got the guts to respond to that question.

So you think that all ghost can send emails to Earth, not just those in heaven or Hell?

I was hoping you could answer that when you're in hell. I'll keep my EVP digital recording ready, in the event you might want to leave a comment.
Yeah...why can't ghosts type emails? Good question cosmo.

How is something I've always said, sans the part about Mordor, a confession under any definition of the word?

Because it's a perfect example of your glib contempt for religion.

So your work for the week was getting all giddy over the thought of a British atheist, your two least favourite things, getting cancer and receiving a reply about not believing in the afterlife?

Actually it was a "what would you do in this situation" question (like the one I typed for you above, remember?), so you didn't have to take it personally. lol You're a moron. lol 

Speaking of laughs, your government just turned inside out. Are you Brits all walking around with hard-ons now? lol

Bet the other European countries think you're a bunch of spunky wankers. 

[–] CosmopolitanHobo 9 years ago

Save those laughs for your judgement day. You'll need the humor at that point.



Would that be a judgment day that's so real it's impossible to provide any sort of evidence of it? You best make sure you keep some gold on you for when you reach the end of your span kurt, there'll be no 'LOLs' from you if you can't pay Charon upon death.

I simply stated that I own guns. I didn't suggest it made the nation safer.

"Leaving Brits defenseless against terrorists and home grown thugs. Yes, how nice it must be for the unarmed teetotallers who can just use their umbrellas."

"I predict the U.K. population will be a sitting duck for terrorists. News headline in the future."

"Apparently being a Brit means embracing defenselessness?"

"As if that condition is going to last forever." (in response to me not worrying about getting shot)

All your comments kurt. There are probably more but I got bored of copying and pasting.

Also related, because I saw it: "By the way, why are your Bobbies armed these days?" (They aren't kurt)

would you have been happy laying on the stale floors waiting to be slaughtered.

I think I'm just happier being in a country where you can't just buy a gun at the local store, and carry it around with you. But that's just me. But yes, I would be happier being shot than knowing anybody could be carrying a gun around at any time. Ooh, looks like I did have the guts to respond to that! Also, recently a British nutjob tried to take a cops gun and shoot your hero Trump, if he'd been an American nutjob he'd have probably just used his backup rifle instead.

Yeah...why can't ghosts type emails? Good question cosmo.

Beasts me, you're the one who keeps mentioning it.

Because it's a perfect example of your glib contempt for religion.

So it's not a confession under any definition of the word? That's all you needed to say.

Actually it was a "what would you do in this situation" question (like the one I typed for you above, remember?), so you didn't have to take it personally. lol You're a moron.

I know, and I responded to it in an appropriate manner because it was a poorly, even disgusting if you're easily offended like you are, worded question.

Speaking of laughs, your government just turned inside out. Are you Brits all walking around with hard-ons now?

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/love-sex/porn-religion-samuel-perry-study-pornography-a7028581.html
Quite apt.

Bet the other European countries think you're a bunch of spunky wankers.

Ignoring your rather filthy language, you do have an obsession the sexual things don't you?

As for the current situation in the UK, if it was at all possible to have any sort of sensible, insult free conversation with you I might entertain the idea of talking about it with you. As it is, I won't.

[–] kurt-2000 9 years ago

Would that be a judgment day that's so real it's impossible to provide any sort of evidence of it? You best make sure you keep some gold on you for when you reach the end of your span kurt, there'll be no 'LOLs' from you if you can't pay Charon upon death.

More evidence that you're only here to ridicule people of faith. Nice of you to provide more evidence of your militant atheist antagonistic behavior.

All your comments kurt.

All my comments are about the U.K. That's a different country from the U.S., dipstick.

I think I'm just happier being in a country where you can't just buy a gun at the local store, and carry it around with you.

With your inherent antagonistic behavior I can see why you're afraid of guns. I'm sure other people would like to shoot you.

But that's just me. But yes, I would be happier being shot than knowing anybody could be carrying a gun around at any time. Ooh, looks like I did have the guts to respond to that!

But you lack the brains to not say it in public. Maybe you and your girlfriend should be seeing different men.

take a cops gun and shoot your hero Trump

More proof you're out of your mind. How many times has this topic been explained to you? lol

if he'd been an American nutjob he'd have probably just used his backup rifle instead.

Maybe you've been watching too many Gunsmoke reruns, Cosmo.

Quite apt

Apparently that's a yes.

Ignoring your rather filthy language, you do have an obsession the sexual things don't you?

Means nothing in the U.S. lol

As for the current situation in the UK, if it was at all possible to have any sort of sensible, insult free conversation with you I might entertain the idea of talking about it with you. As it is, I won't.

You already confessed in a different post that your fellow Brits made a stupid mistake. Now watch under-developed Europe under-cut every manufactured product in the U.K.

Good boy, tuck tail and run from Brit political issues. You lost all those arguments as well.

[–] CosmopolitanHobo 9 years ago

More evidence that you're only here to ridicule people of faith

ridiculous. Please learn to understand what's actually been said before responding.

All my comments are about the U.K. That's a different country from the U.S., dipstick.

You claimed that you never said guns make the nation safer, it doesn't matter which nation you were talking about, and as it all arose from a comparison between a country that loves guns (U.S.A) and on that doesn't (Uk), your current attempt to put me down has completely failed.

I'm sure other people would like to shoot you.

How many times kurt, you don't represent anyone but your yourself, stop speaking on behalf of others.

But you lack the brains to not say it in public.

This is utterly meaningless. I know you were hoping to have caught me out with a question I wouldn't answer, but you'll need to be a hell of a lot smarter than you are to achieve that result.

Maybe you and your girlfriend should be seeing different men.

That's right kurt, delve into your homophobic thoughts.

More proof you're out of your mind. How many times has this topic been explained to you?

I don't know, how many times has the topic of someone trying to steal a policeman's gun been explained to me? Being slightly less flippant, you saying that Trump isn't your hero is no more believable than you saying that you don't hate atheists. Or the British. Or gays. And let's not forget all sexist remarks you've previously made, though thankfully not for a very long time so maybe you have grown out of that.

Apparently that's a yes.

A yes that those who watch a lot of porn, and have sex constantly on their mind become religious? I'd say so, but then you're militantly anti-religious aren't you, so who knows?

Means nothing in the U.S.

Seriously, do you think that the internet is completely American? And if you're talking to non Americans, specifically the British, then you're well aware of how it's taken to be. So don't pretend you don't know what you're doing. You may be childlike and ignorant in almost every aspect, but when it comes to being completely rude and foul mouthed you clearly know what you're doing, despite also being incredibly immature with it.

You already confessed in a different post that your fellow Brits made a stupid mistake.

Could you please stop following around boards that have precisely nothing to do with this film kurt. THAT IS STALKING. And I'm not interested in playing with you so won't be responding to any posts you send to me on there.

run from Brit political issues. You lost all those arguments as well.

Like the thread I first joined in with on here, where you were put in your place by two Brits because you were completely talking out of your arse in regard to political issues in Britain? You know, the one you deleted because you were being shown up in it and were too embarrassed to allow it to remain.
I've got no reason to run from British political issues, but on this particular one I have less than no interest in discussing it with someone like you for several reasons.

[–] kurt-2000 9 years ago

ridiculous. Please learn to understand what's actually been said before responding.

Suck an egg.

You claimed that you never said guns make the nation safer,

ridiculous. Please learn to understand what's actually been said before responding.

How many times kurt, you don't represent anyone but your yourself, stop speaking on behalf of others.

If you had friends, you won't be living on three IMDb boards daily.

A yes that those who watch a lot of porn, and have sex constantly on their mind become religious?

cosmo you're a pervert.

you're militantly anti-religious aren't you

You're also mentally deranged.

but when it comes to being completely rude and foul mouthed you clearly know what you're doing, despite also being incredibly immature with it.

This comes from the same clown that typed: "A yes that those who watch a lot of porn, and have sex constantly on their mind become religious?"

You're an idiot.

Seriously, do you think that the internet is completely American?

Yes. Now go find a job cosmo.

Could you please stop following around boards that have precisely nothing to do with this film kurt. THAT IS STALKING.

GND has nothing to do with GND2? Check your own comment history, dip stick. I was on GND and GND2 long before you were.

You know, the one you deleted because you were being shown up in it and were too embarrassed to allow it to remain.

Wrong. Because you were making a complete fool of yourself like you are here. And the dizzy Brits are no long in the EU, which is another stupid decision you people have made.

[–] CosmopolitanHobo 9 years ago

Suck an egg.

Quick as a flash and witty as always I see.

ridiculous. Please learn to understand what's actually been said before responding.

I know you think you're being clever, but I can refer you back to all that's previously been said if you'd like? I know you rarely remember anything, assuming it's genuine, but I tend to go back over previous comments before making my own, just so I know I'm keeping things accurate and in context. You should try it some time.

If you had friends, you won't be living on three IMDb boards daily.

Is that why you're on four IMDb boards daily? See, I can sneak a peek at your comment history too. I'm sorry to hear your confession that you don't have any friends, and I assume that the batteries have worn out on your 'wife' too.

cosmo you're a pervert.

I'll take that as confirmation. And Cosmo is capitalised, you're ridiculing everyone who has a capitalised username.

You're also mentally deranged.

And I'll take that as further confirmation as well.

This comes from the same clown that typed: "A yes that those who watch a lot of porn, and have sex constantly on their mind become religious?"

What do you consider foul mouthed about any of that? Also, what's rude about asking a question related to a news story?

Yes.

It'd be nice to think you're joking, but I know you're not.

GND has nothing to do with GND2? Check your own comment history, dip stick. I was on GND and GND2 long before you were.

Guess what genius? My comment that this is in response to wasn't about GND or GND2, it was about a thread on Film General that you followed me on. Seriously, just read back through the previous discussion because insulting people for doing something that you wrongly consider to be incorrect is quite foolish, albeit amusing to me.

Wrong. Because you were making a complete fool of yourself like you are here.

Please see the response directly above this one.

And the dizzy Brits are no long in the EU, which is another stupid decision you people have made.

Says the Trump supporter.

[–] kurt-2000 8 years ago

Says the Trump supporter.

You're completely out of your mind.

[–] kurt-2000 8 years ago

Many congregations are not only open and accepting of homosexuals

The United Church of Christ is.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

An elderly Christian man once told me that you can tell a Christian by their love. God said, "Whoever claims to love God yet hates a brother or sister is a liar. " (1 John 4:20) Therefore if you are my brother in Christ Jesus, then that makes me your sister so if I am your sister in Christ with different beliefs than yours, then, you need to follow Jesus' teachings too and not just read the scriptures to yourself but "put Jesus teachings into practice." (James 1:22 )

"Keep reminding God's people of these things. Warn them before God against quarreling about words; it is of no value, and only ruins those who listen. (2 Timothy 2:14)

"For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you, but if you do not forgive others their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses." Matthew 6:14-15

A Pastor said once, "Sometimes God uses an ordinary person to talk to you. Once, I took my sons into a Barber Shop in Etowah, Tennessee and the Barber there, was also a Minister. The Minister and I, got to talking about the undocumented Mexicans coming into United States controversy that has been going on for years. The Minister told me "this is no coincidence, God sent you to talk to me." I agreed.

And God said: "Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Matthew 18:3

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

"'These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me." 1 John 4:7

Why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but fail to notice the beam in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ while there is still a beam in your own eye? You hypocrite! First take the beam out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. Matthew 7:3-5

"Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, love for the Father is not in them." 1 John 2:15

Anything that takes your attention excessively, away from the God is loving that thing. Can public books or history books be one of them? Yes, anything could take your love from God. What are the signs? How much time do you spend with the thing you spend so much time with? IMDb posts? Internet? How much time do you give God, daily? How much time in prayer? How much time reading the Word of God? If you are spending much of your spare time with worldly things, then meditate on these scriptures:

Jesus replied: "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind." Matthew 22:37

Do not worship any other god, for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God. Exodus 34:14

One suggestion: spare history lessons: it puts people right to sleep... history is BORING. I understand you love history. Just saying.

And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.Matthew 7:1-2

I received my calling to serve others.

"If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, leave that home or town and shake the dust off your feet." Matthew 10:14

I am no longer a Catholic. You must have missed that part of my bio. I lost my temper with Pastrami and by the Power of the Holy Spirit's conviction, I have repented for it. Normally, I leave people to believe the way they want to, even if I believe it to be wrong. What's the use, they will hate you for it, anyway. If the Lord wills, and I live, I will continue to pray for you. Bye.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

To Science-Forum:

The Bible disagrees with you on so many of these matters and you have very limited knowledge.

I have given you countless biblical scriptures, whereas Science Forum - you have NOT. You use words from your mouth and NOT from God's words.

Dates and Times of History, scholars and the world's books are NOT granting anyone Salvation. You can't buy your way to Heaven.

I could care less about people's degrees or who possess a scholar, does it mean they will go to Heaven? If a wicked man went to a recognize University to get a scholar and use it against God, would this man go to Heaven? Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? 1 Corinthians 6:9

If I didn't know better, when reading your posts, carrying on how smart you are: I may have fallen for it. Therefore, if you ever were a Pastor then you have lost your focus on God/Jesus or you are pretending to be a godly man. -Only your deeds/fruit will expose you for the one that you are.

"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. Matthew 7:15

The words of God will remain forever....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zaaiFp4RSM - "Your Words" by Third Day, with lyrics - Yes! Thank you Jesus!

[–] archer1812 9 years ago

I see that you completely changed your response to me. Good idea, since it showed you to be an ignorant, arrogant fanatic. It was also quite amusing to see your reaction at finding out that the Rapture concept that you adhere to is a fairly modern invention and that only a minority of Christians believe. It speaks volumes about you and the bubble, theological and otherwise, that you live in.

I thought the above sites could show reference that many Christians believe others to be false Christians or False religions. This has been going on for decades but for non-believers, they don't have a clue about the separations of religious groups.

All that proves is that there are ignorant, arrogant fanatics in all circles. Like you, claiming that Catholics are not Christians. And I'm sure there are many many Christians (including some orthodox Catholics) that believe that you are a heretic and are going to hell.

Going on for decades? Try centuries. Since the beginning of Christianity when different churches began to branch out. Though that's nothing like today.

Take you Baptists, for example. You've only been around since the 17th Century, with most churches springing up in the 19th and 20th century. It seems like every time there is difference of opinion in a Baptist church, someone branches out and starts a new church, with the "correct" interpretation, of course. That cartoon that bible-and-science-forum posted fits you to a tee.

http://www.godofevolution.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/RRWJKpn.jpg

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

That cartoon that bible-and-science-forum posted fits you to a tee.

Yes, she is illustrating a very common phenomenon. If you do not agree with her 100% and occupy the same sect on that family tree of denominational genealogy, she will arbitrarily declare:

"...you weren't applying these Holy Scriptures to your daily life...that is missing God's best for you."

Both Jesus (when that mindset arose among his disciples) and the Apostle Paul (when it regularly arose among the regional churches he had founded) denounced that kind of prideful and ignorant judgment of other believers.

One could attribute it to her being not yet well grounded in the scriptures and very spiritually immature---but, while that is certainly true, it is mainly because she learned the behavior from others within her sect. They taught her to be arrogantly judgmental despite lack of evidence to support her judgments.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 9 years ago

The first major division within Christendom came in 1054, with the Great Schism between the Western Church and the Eastern Church. From that point forward, there were two large branches of Christianity, which came to be known as the Catholic Church (in the West) and the Orthodox Church (in the East).

The next major division was the Protestant Reformation, sparked in 1517 by Martin Luther's publication of "95 Theses" against certain Catholic practices. By 1529, German princes were demanding the right to choose between Lutheranism and Catholicism in their territories. (These demands were published in a document titled Protestation, giving the Protestant movement its name.)

Meanwhile, "Reformed" Christianity developed in Switzerland based on the teachings of Ulrich Zwingli and John Calvin. When it spread to Scotland under John Knox, the Reformed faith became Presbyterianism. Switzerland was also the birthplace of the Anabaptists, spiritual ancestors of today's Amish, Mennonites, Quakers, and Baptists.

Anglicanism was established in 1534 when England's King Henry VIII broke from the authority of the Pope. Anglicanism is often regarded as a "Middle Way" between Catholicism and Protestantism , while others categorize it as Protestant. Anglicanism became Episcopalianism in the United States. Methodism, based on the teachings of John Wesley, also has its roots in Anglicanism.

Those who remained within the fold of Roman Catholicism during the Reformation argued that central regulation of doctrine is necessary to prevent confusion and division within the church and corruption of beliefs. Protestants, on the other hand, insisted that it was precisely this policy of control that had already led to corruption of the true faith. They demanded that believers be allowed to read the Scriptures for themselves (it was previously available only in Latin) and act in accordance with their conscience. This issue of religious authority continues to be a fundamental difference in perspective between Catholic and Orthodox Christians on one hand, and Protestant Christians on the other.

With its emphasis on individual interpretation of scripture and a measure of religious freedom, the Reformation marked not only a break between Protestantism and Catholicism, but the beginning of Christian denominationalism and sectarianism as we know it today. And perhaps not surprisingly, some of the most interesting developments in Christianity have occurred in the United States, where individual freedom in all things is intensely valued. Christian Science, Mormonism, and the Jehovah's Witnesses are just a few of the major religious movements that have developed in this context.

Today, Christianity encompasses an astounding variety of denominations, sects, and churches. Relationships between these groups range from mutual respect and cooperation to denial that the other group is really "Christian." Many Christian groups would also refuse the label of "Christian denomination," considering themselves the only true form of Christianity, not one among many.

At ReligionFacts, we simply list any group that self-identifies as Christian and/or is based significantly on the life or teachings of Jesus under the broad category of "Christianity."

Reference link: http://www.religionfacts.com/christianity/branches

[–] archer1812 9 years ago

I am going by the old definition of Christian. The new Christian Dictionary definition puts every religion together which is terribly wrong.

You're not making yourself clear when you say that they "put every religion together". Do you mean that they list every religion under the heading of Christianity? Then yes, of course that would be wrong. Though I highly doubt that's what they did. Or did you mean to say that they put every Christian denomination under the heading of Christianity? Then in that case they are correct, of course.

Therefore, we were both right. You are right because you are going by the newest definition that all faiths are Christians.

No, you are simply not right about this. And I'm not right because of some alleged 'new definition'. I'm right because it has always been so, since the time of Christ. Unlike your particular church, which probably just sprung up a few decades ago with finally the 'correct' interpretation, right?

You call my Catholic sister-in-law or Catholic mother-in-law "Christian" and see how angry they get with you!

Pardon me if I don't believe you. I have never heard of a Catholic get angry because they were called a Christian. That's just outlandish. However, in the extremely unlikely case that you are telling the truth, then they are equally deluded. I suppose that's a consequence of living in the Bible Belt full of protestant evangelicals and baptists and having to be on the defensive. I mean seriously, what kind of Catholics are they? Haven't they listen to the Pope? Or the previous ones? They use the word Christian to refer to the Church all the time.
So yes, I don't believe you. Perhaps you are mistaken. You should ask them to be clear.

Remember, someone is NOT ignorant because they have different information than yours. I know first hand because I been out there with different denomination and non-denominations.

If that someone is basing their opinions on false information, then yes, that someone is still ignorant. Misinformation is a kind of ignorance.

For example, many denominations don't like Church of Christ because some Church of Christ members believe, they are the only ones going to Heaven. Last week, I read on the internet that some Catholics, believed they were the only ones going to Heaven. You see, that is what differentiates the different denominations and non-denominations because their beliefs and views are so very different from each other.

I really don't know much about that church. And yes, I do know that some Catholics believe that about you protestants. After all, they think you as heretics, and theologically speaking, they have a point. But I don't see why you're trying to explain to me about what constitutes different denominations. It is you who believes that there is only one "Christian denomination", as you had put it before, and that yours is the one worthy of being called Christian.

However, I know when I am wrong and big enough to admit that I was wrong saying you didn't know what you were talking about.....so I apologize.

There was no need to apologize. But thank you, apology accepted.

[–] JC_gives_u_hope 8 years ago

To Archer1812:

I am just seeing this for the first time, as I have been very busy with my husband's illnesses (Liver Disease and now Cancer) so I cannot get on here as soon as someone posts (you posted this April 27, 2016).

You said: I have never heard of a Catholic get angry because they were called a Christian.

My answer: Just because you have never met a leper, doesn't mean they don't exist. My in-laws are from Fort Worth, Texas so isn't it possible that you have not met Catholics like these? You have just not met any that insist in being called Catholics and not Christians. Why would I have a reason to lie to you? I am telling you the truth. If you don't want to believe the truth I am giving you then it doesn't make me a liar: you just don't want to understand (accept) it.

When we lived in Sidney, Ohio for three years, my landlord Laura, who is Catholic, said to me "you are a Christian so you're supposed to go by the Bible." I told her that the Bible teachings (NT) are meant for all of us, not just the ones who call themselves Christians. My landlord and I, were having a disagreement about how the bible applies to me but doesn't apply to her because she is a Catholic.

I guess this is a first for you: not knowing people that don't want to be referred as a "Christian" and they insist in being called solely a Catholic.

The link below is an article that I found, about the Pope/Catholic Church that backs up what I was saying earlier.

The Catholic Church is against telling their Catholic members to read their bibles.

The article includes the Catholic views why they don't want their Church members to read the bible. At the end of the article, the author gives references, too.

http://www.bible.ca/cath-bible-attitude-towards.htm#neverintend - this backs up what I was telling you....

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

I am going by the old definition of Christian. The new Christian Dictionary definition puts every religion together which is terribly wrong.

I generally use the term as it was first applied in the first century, when it was first applied in Antioch (see Acts 11:26).

The Koine Greek word Χριστιανός (CHRISTIANOS) meant "Christ-follower", which refers to the CHRIST (the "anointed one"). The adjectival suffix was probably borrowed from Latin of the time and implies a slave ownership, that is, the Christ-follower is what the Apostle Paul liked to call a "bond-servant of Jesus Christ."

Obviously, the Koine term referred to anyone who claimed to be a follower of Christ. That included a diverse range of doctrinal beliefs, just as it does today. (Diverse beliefs in the early Church were largely due to a lack of "Christian education" and opportunity to know all that much about what a Christ-follower should believe. The early centuries of the Church focused a lot of energy on working out what it meant to be a Christian.)

Thus, Protestants, Roman Catholics, and Eastern Orthodox are all "Christians". If some individual sects within those divisions happen to dislike the term "Christian", that doesn't mean that the standard label somehow exempts them. A Christian is one who self-identifies as a follower or disciple of Christ. But it also applies to anyone who meets that definition. Arguments about who is a "genuine Christian" is a whole 'nother debate. (For that, pedantry is often the name of the game.)

Precisely because "Christian" has become such a generic term, I have always preferred the term "Christ-follower" as my own self-label, although others would want a more specific description, so I often will explain that I am a born-again, Bible-affirming, evangelical Christ-follower. (If they need even more description, I might also say that I'm a post-trib premillennial Molinist Christ-follower.)

Scripture is full of warnings about the dangers of our making judgments about who is and isn't a "genuine Christian". Phariseeism has always been a problem in the Church because it is part of the sin nature to ADD to God's plan of salvation and letting the man-made cherished TRADITIONS of our own church or denomination list additional requirements as to what "true" Christians must believe. (For example, some fundamentalist Christians claim that a "genuine Christian" must affirm a six 24-hour day creation, a pretribulational rapture, and a rejection of infant baptism. Of course, some Roman Catholics have just as many traditional rules. Many groups claim that their sect alone is "truly Christian" or even "Christian" at all.)

Of course, an Eastern Orthodox Christian (for example) is obviously a Christian---because they certainly aren't Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, Mormon, Bahai, or some other religion. So those who insist on excluding millions of Christians from the label may be pedants at best and defying scripture at worst.

As I wrote previously in response to a lot of mistakenly and misleading statements about Charles Stanley, I can also say that he would agree with everything I just wrote. We don't agree on every doctrinal detail (e.g., the last I talked to Stanley, he was not a Molinist) but certainly agree on these general facts of terms and definitions.

[–] archer1812 9 years ago

A very good and thorough answer. I hope that it doesn't fall on deaf ears.

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

A very good and thorough answer. I hope that it doesn't fall on deaf ears.

Yes. But it will.

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

Therefore, we were both right. You are right because you are going by the newest definition that all faiths are Christians.

No. Nobody rational would claim that "all faiths are Christians."

My Hindu neighbor is NOT a Christian.

I used to have a faculty colleague who self-identified as of "the Mahāyāna faith tradition", the most common form of Buddhism. He is not a Christian.

A Sunni Muslim is NOT a Christian. (Of course, all Muslims eagerly await the return of Jesus, although they call him Isa, "the penultimate prophet and messenger of God", as one of my colleagues likes to phrase it. Yet, I've often been challenged by Christians online on this fact, adamantly denying that Muslims eagerly await the second coming of Jesus. See Kruger-Dunning Effect.)

Of course, even the word "faith" must be applied carefully with an awareness of the many definitions. In the New Testament, it usually translates PISTIS, with a semantic domain which includes "faith", "trust", "reverent obedience", and "confidence". Faith as in "religious faith" or "faith tradition" has become a standard term for religious affiliation.

There have been a lot of bizarre claims posted on these threads. (Again, check out the Kruger-Dunning Effect.)

[–] JediColt 9 years ago

Its so refreshing to see a fellow Christian who knows so much about both our faith and other faiths. I've always found it strange that so many Americans rail against Islam and speak out against the Koran but view Judaism as if it is the same as Christianity.

The Muslim faith recognizes Jesus as the messiah, acknowledges that he performed miracles and Jesus is mentioned all through the Koran. You are right that they are not Christians as they don't view Jesus as the son of God but in many ways their views on Jesus are closer to ours than Jews. I find a lot of similarities between Islam and the Mormon faith.

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

I find a lot of similarities between Islam and the Mormon faith.

Very true. And as you said, in many ways Islam is closer to Christian beliefs than is Judaism, especially in regards to beliefs about Jesus.

I encourage Christians to read the many Internet pages (e.g., Wikipedia) about Jesus in Islam.

All good Muslims look forward to the second coming of Jesus.

[–] Digsys-Diner 9 years ago

all good Muslims look forward to the second coming of Jesus.

Looking forward to the second coming of Jesus is something only good Muslims can do?

*I edit for grammar now.

[–] bible-and-science-forum 9 years ago

Looking forward to the second coming of Jesus is something only good Muslims can do?

I'm quoting from Muslims who use exactly that wording when speaking in English.

I've known many Muslims in the academy (as well as outside the academy) who regularly distinguish the beliefs of a "good Muslim" from those who have become "too Westernized" or generally casual about their observance of Islam.

Of course, Christians have similar vocabulary for distinguishing a "true Christian" from those who have a vague "corrupted version".

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] HelloMyNameIsMrBurns 9 years ago

I don't even know what it is and I was raised Catholic, so I'm guessing no.

[–] watchman19 8 years ago

No. Many feel that it is a misunderstanding of scripture and taking things out of their proper context that has led to this Rapture doctrine.