- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Venial Sin my butt!
Posted on 3/26/24 at 11:09 pm to catholictigerfan
Posted on 3/26/24 at 11:09 pm to catholictigerfan
quote:
I agree science and the bible support a clear beginning. But honestly even if it didn't I would still believe in God.
Me too!
quote:
is an infinite regress impossible
Yes. If there were an infinite number of days preceding today, then you would have to cross an infinite number of days to get to today- which is logically impossible.
quote:
as in the universe logically must be finite
Logically, the universe must have a finite beginning, but can be eternal from that beginning. There is nothing illogical about an infinite future- only an infinite past/regress.
quote:
While I need to brush up on my philosophy, I know that even if an unending universe did exist, this wouldn't disprove the need for an existence of God. Something must in a sense uphold the existence of all things.
Philosophy aside, I recommend you check out Stephen C Meyer for the best case for Intelligent Design. The fine tuning of the universe is quite compelling.
quote:
I'm sure our atheists friends will laugh at this but I trust what Thomas Aquinas says and has reasoned over what some random atheist has said on a message board!
I’m sure they will. That’s fine. I count it all joy. Besides, it’s ok for us to laugh at them too. For instance, you should go back and read the posts where certain people on this board tried to explain how when Dawkins said “ Biology is the study of complicated things that have the appearance of having been designed with a purpose” that he didn’t really mean that life appears to be designed.
Uh oh- I bet I kicked the hornet’s nest
0
Posted on 3/27/24 at 6:10 am to Champagne
quote:
Yes, and on this Holy Thursday, we will celebrate the evening of The Last Supper, which was the very first Holy Mass.
amen!
Also happy Spy Wednesday! Today's Gospel reading is Judas taking 30 pieces of silver to hand over our Lord and savior. While this is certainly an evil act God made good out of it by putting in motion the events that would bring us salvation.
edit: also I heard somewhere that slaves in the time of Jesus would be sold for 30 pieces of silver, signifying the fact that Jesus became a slave to set us free from our slavery to sin!
This post was edited on 3/27/24 at 6:14 am
Posted on 3/27/24 at 6:47 pm to Prodigal Son
quote:
God, being a spaceless, timeless, immaterial Being who is, by nature, eternal and infinite-
The god who ate dinner with Abraham, spoke with Moses face to face as someone speaks to a friend, wrestles with Jacob (and loses
), the god of armies “hosts” who loses battles, the god who is jealous of other gods, and who is threatened by simpletons building a tall building “reaching to the heavens” out of bricks and mortar, and who has to send angels down to Sodom to check out how many righteous people they had… the god who rides on the clouds and hurls bolts of lightning… who inherited a shitty group of desert dwelling goat herders from his father the most high El Elyon… Are you stupid or something (voice of Jenny from Forrest Gump)?
quote:
Thank you for not being offended
No offense but I don’t get offended by message board people except for maybe anti-2nd amendment or anti free speech commies.
quote:
I’ll take the W
You’ll take nothing of the sort.
quote:
Well, I’m pretty sure that’s not even a word
The legacy of “i” being next to the “u”. Damn you Christopher Sholes. Just kidding. But seriously damn that guy Henry Phillips… hope he’s burning in hell for inventing the Phillips head screw.
quote:
Anyway, the Hebrews descended from Abraham. Into the land of Canaan. Surprise- not all of his descendants (much less all of Noah’s descendants)
Neither Abraham nor Noah existed. But… even if Abraham of Ur of the Chaldeans (Babylonians) existed, it’s very simple archaeology and genetics to show that the Israelites circa 1200 to 500BCE were not descended from Mesopotamia. Genetically they were identical to Canaanites including Phoenicians. This is simple stuff man. No links.
I know you wont believe this but Abraham as the father of the Israelites was made up by the elite class to stake a claim to the land of Judah and Israel by the returning exile. Their claim was that “real” Jews come from Babylon. A rival sect claimed the land was actually promised to them by a god through their father Moses. That’s how both covenant stories ended up in the Bible. The Jews living there who weren’t returning from exile were the outcasts who were kicked out of their land and Jerusalem. The retuning exiles labeled them “Canaanites” as a slur. They worshiped El Elyon the father (Israel), Yahweh the storm god son of Elyon, Elyon’s consort/wife Asherah “Queen of Heaven”, and Yahweh’s wife Anat (all of which were worshipped by Jews in Elephantine Egypt until about 300BCE… well into the more “monotheistic” Persian-built temple period). These “Canaanites” were cast out of Jerusalem to the wilderness, where they developed into sects like the Essenes which were awaiting a return of the messiah (the anointed King, like David, Solomon, Ahaz, Hezekiah, etc.) to liberate them from foreign control and destroy the corrupt temple of the Pharisees and Saducees. So the ones claiming to be the offspring of Abraham and of Moses actually displaced the Jewish sect that eventually became the Christians. And you and everyone else are oblivious. It’s common knowledge in biblical scholarship community.
quote:
still believed by billions of people across many cultures throughout thousands of years
Mass delusion is no reason to justify the belief and no reason to join in the delusion. There’s billions of Muslims and Hindus. Doesn’t make them right either.
quote:
false gods of antiquity
quote:
You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the LORD your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me,
This is one of my favorite verses of Exodus. It is implicit that the author believes the other gods (the ones you call false or non-existent) were real, and had a mind with an agenda that people could serve, and that these other gods were peers of Yahweh as Yahweh was jealous of them.
You’ve admitted in the past you learned from Dr. Heiser about the divine council of psalms 82 and 89. But you weirdly reject the multiple gods that the authors of exodus and Jeremiah and Deuteronomy believed were real. You are inconsistent.
Posted on 3/27/24 at 10:17 pm to Squirrelmeister
I noticed you had no response to the exposure of your materialistic naturalism. No response to the explanation of the closed system of the universe (as evidenced by the principle of mass conservation), and you’re still striking out on the first premise of the cosmological argument. Interesting.
You’ve never heard of a “theophany?”
Do you have children? I do. I used to wrestle with them- and let them win. Nowadays, I let them beat me in basketball (sometimes). I find it’s a great way to build their confidence while improving their abilities.
It’s not God who loses battles. It’s the Israelites. Whenever they turn their backs on Him.
How would you feel if the love of your life was banging wooden statues?
It wasn’t about the building, you simp. It was about their refusal to spread throughout the earth.
He didn’t send them to count the righteous- He sent them to destroy the wicked.
Allegory and metaphor. Beautiful imagery.
His strength is made perfect in our weakness.
Just another name for the same God.
Are you mad?
Interesting. So, you’re selective about which group of “delusional” people you let ruffle your feathers. I suppose it makes sense- as you firmly believe that this life is all there is, and that you’re in control of it.
So you can prove premise 1 wrong? Un-L-ikely.
That’s ironic- I feel the same way about the flathead screw. Screw that guy!
Yes they did.
Oxymoron.
More unfalsifiable theories from liberal critical scholars. I have more respect for meteorologists than these propagandists.
They’re a lot closer to right than you are.
Sure it is. Much like how “Biology is the study of complicated things that give the illusion of having been designed for a purpose” is one of my favorite Dawkins quotes.
I admit it’s plausible. As are other interpretations. I also admit it’s more intriguing than other interpretations. I’m not willing to accept it as fact. There’s nothing inconsistent about that. For an example of inconsistency, I recommend you examine the secular humanist approach to objective morality. It is an absolute master class of mental gymnastics.
Good night, my friend.
quote:
The god who ate dinner with Abraham, spoke with Moses face to face as someone speaks to a friend, wrestles with Jacob
You’ve never heard of a “theophany?”
quote:
wrestles with Jacob (and loses ),
Do you have children? I do. I used to wrestle with them- and let them win. Nowadays, I let them beat me in basketball (sometimes). I find it’s a great way to build their confidence while improving their abilities.
quote:
the god of armies “hosts” who loses battles
It’s not God who loses battles. It’s the Israelites. Whenever they turn their backs on Him.
quote:
the god who is jealous of other gods
How would you feel if the love of your life was banging wooden statues?
quote:
who is threatened by simpletons building a tall building
It wasn’t about the building, you simp.
It was about their refusal to spread throughout the earth. quote:
who has to send angels down to Sodom to check out how many righteous people they had
He didn’t send them to count the righteous- He sent them to destroy the wicked.
quote:
the god who rides on the clouds and hurls bolts of lightning
Allegory and metaphor. Beautiful imagery.
quote:
who inherited a shitty group of desert dwelling goat herders
His strength is made perfect in our weakness.
quote:
the most high El Elyon…
Just another name for the same God.
quote:
Are you stupid or something
Are you mad?
quote:
No offense but I don’t get offended by message board people except for maybe anti-2nd amendment or anti free speech commies
Interesting. So, you’re selective about which group of “delusional” people you let ruffle your feathers. I suppose it makes sense- as you firmly believe that this life is all there is, and that you’re in control of it.
quote:
You’ll take nothing of the sort
So you can prove premise 1 wrong? Un-L-ikely.
quote:
But seriously damn that guy Henry Phillips… hope he’s burning in hell for inventing the Phillips head screw
That’s ironic- I feel the same way about the flathead screw. Screw that guy!
quote:
Neither Abraham nor Noah existed
Yes they did.
quote:
it’s very simple archaeology and genetics
Oxymoron.
quote:
Blah blah blah
More unfalsifiable theories from liberal critical scholars. I have more respect for meteorologists than these propagandists.
quote:
There’s billions of Muslims and Hindus. Doesn’t make them right either.
They’re a lot closer to right than you are.
quote:
This is one of my favorite verses of Exodus
Sure it is. Much like how “Biology is the study of complicated things that give the illusion of having been designed for a purpose” is one of my favorite Dawkins quotes.
quote:
You’ve admitted in the past you learned from Dr. Heiser about the divine council of psalms 82 and 89. But you weirdly reject the multiple gods that the authors of exodus and Jeremiah and Deuteronomy believed were real. You are inconsistent.
I admit it’s plausible. As are other interpretations. I also admit it’s more intriguing than other interpretations. I’m not willing to accept it as fact. There’s nothing inconsistent about that. For an example of inconsistency, I recommend you examine the secular humanist approach to objective morality. It is an absolute master class of mental gymnastics.
Good night, my friend.
Posted on 3/28/24 at 6:33 am to Prodigal Son
quote:
No response to the explanation of the closed system of the universe
There’s no point and it doesn’t matter.
quote:
You’ve never heard of a “theophany?”
You ever heard that the Elohim made humans in the likeness and image of… the Elohim? Never heard of Yahweh Elohim walking through the garden of Eden in the cool of the evening? Is he walking around without a body? Sorry, your immaterial god idea doesn’t hold water. I’d be pretty hard for baby Jesus to make humans in the likeness and image of God if God had not a body.
quote:
Do you have children? I do. I used to wrestle with them- and let them win. Nowadays, I let them beat me in basketball (sometimes). I find it’s a great way to build their confidence while improving their abilities.
quote:
24And Jacob was left alone. And a man wrestled with him until the breaking of the day. 25When the man saw that he did not prevail against Jacob, he touched his hip socket, and Jacob’s hip was put out of joint as he wrestled with him. 26Then he said, “Let me go, for the day has broken.” But Jacob said, “I will not let you go unless you bless me.” 27And he said to him, “What is your name?” And he said, “Jacob.” 28Then he said, “Your name shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel, for you have striven with God and with men, and have prevailed.”
There’s a lot to unpack there. God didn’t let Jacob win. God asked to be let go and Jacob wouldn’t release him, so he hit him below the belt. If this is the divine word of God, it is clear that Jacob defeated God, and so you have to believe it.
I wish I remembered which story this is based on but it is a Greek myth if I remember correctly. The sun god wrestled with a Greek hero, and it was time for the sun god to raise the sun as it was time for daybreak and the hero wouldn’t release him. The sun god pokes the hero in the nads in a cheating move to secure his release so he can raise the sun.
quote:
It’s not God who loses battles. It’s the Israelites. Whenever they turn their backs on Him.
No, you believe the Bible is the inspired word and truth. Believe it then when they cannot defeat the Canaanites of the plains because they had chariots of iron. That is the reason given, and it wasn’t because Israel had “turned away” from “god”. Believe the true word of god in 2 Kings 3 when Elisha who was with god promised Jehoram a victory over Moab, but because Mesha sacrificed his son on the wall, a great divine fury (from Chemosh god of Moab) drove back the Israelite coalition. It doesn’t say the Israelites turned their backs on “god” in that one either.
quote:
How would you feel if the love of your life was banging wooden statues?
I showed you already the authors believed those other gods to be real. It’s the inspired word. You should believe it. You are being obtuse.
quote:
It wasn’t about the building, you simp. It was about their refusal to spread throughout the earth.
quote:
4Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be dispersed over the face of the whole earth.” 5And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of man had built. 6And the LORD said, “Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language, and this is only the beginning of what they will do. And nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them. 7Come, let us go down and there confuse their language, so that they may not understand one another’s speech.”
That’s the issue. Because they have one language there’s nothing they won’t be able to do, even invading heaven. He wasn’t pissed at them for not spreading out. He was scared that the people could do anything they wanted - they didn’t need god anymore and they could invade heaven. As a result, he confused them and spread them out to stop them. Certainly you can comprehend this.
quote:
Allegory and metaphor. Beautiful imagery.
Whatever
sucks that your god was basically Zeus, who like Yahweh was just a cheap copy of the Canaanite/Phoenician storm god Baal. quote:
Just another name for the same God.
Deut 32:8-9. El Elyon doesn’t divide the nations based on the number of his sons, and give out inheritances… to himself. One doesn’t inherit something from himself. Sorry dude but your argument is weak. Mine is strong and correct. For someone that claims that the Bible is the word of god and the truth, you seem to be great at rejecting the truth.
quote:
More unfalsifiable theories from liberal critical scholars. I have more respect for meteorologists than these propagandists.
You act like the cartoon ostrich who sticks his head in the sand.
quote:
They’re a lot closer to right than you are.
Your argument was that there are billions of Christians so they can’t possible be wrong. It’s fallacious by itself, but also consider there are many more billions who are NOT Christians, so applying your same logic, they also can’t be wrong?
quote:
Dawkins quotes.
He’s talking about uneducated people like you who are deluded into believing an illusion. An illusion is false reality.
quote:
I admit it’s plausible. As are other interpretations. I also admit it’s more intriguing than other interpretations. I’m not willing to accept it as fact.
It’s inspired word of god. It’s in your book. Believe it. Or reject God’s word and possibly piss off god. You know what happens to people that piss off god…
quote:
secular humanist approach to objective morality.
Never heard of this. All morality is subjective. There is no objective morality, period.
Posted on 3/28/24 at 6:41 am to Prodigal Son
Happy Holy Thursday/ Maundy Thursday to all of you!
Happy day when Jesus instituted the Eucharist!
edit: I listen to this podcast every morning. It was very insightful this morning! I know our protestant brothers will scoff at the rosary and probably the Eucharist too, but I know the catholics on the board may enjoy it! LINK
Happy day when Jesus instituted the Eucharist!
edit: I listen to this podcast every morning. It was very insightful this morning! I know our protestant brothers will scoff at the rosary and probably the Eucharist too, but I know the catholics on the board may enjoy it! LINK
This post was edited on 3/28/24 at 6:56 am
Posted on 3/28/24 at 6:53 am to catholictigerfan
If you invented a Time Machine to go back and witness the death and resurrection of Jesus, but your Time Machine inadvertently landed on and killed Judas, would you fill in for him so that the timeline won’t be altered and people would be saved? Would you show the elders and scribes, or the high priests, or the soldiers (depends on which gospel account you want to believe) where Jesus is eating supper and go kiss him on the cheek? Would you send the god who created the universe - and innocent man - to his death to be tortured?
Posted on 3/28/24 at 7:19 am to catholictigerfan
quote:
I know the catholics on the board
Any of my fellow Catholic baws ever consider getting a Masters in Theology from their local seminary? I’m mulling that over, as well as discerning becoming a Deacon.
Happy Holy Thursday Baws, and thank you Jesus for what you did for us!
This post was edited on 3/28/24 at 7:22 am
Posted on 3/28/24 at 8:51 am to DVA Tailgater
As far as I know, the study regimen to become a Deacon in the RCC is a four-year program of taking graduate-level classes. If that is not a Masters Degree in Theology, it should be, IMHO.
It's a LOT of schooling and study.
It's a LOT of schooling and study.
Posted on 3/28/24 at 9:11 am to Champagne
quote:
If that is not a Masters Degree in Theology, it should be, IMHO.
It is, but you can also get it as a lay person if you decide not to get ordained.
Posted on 3/28/24 at 9:19 am to catholictigerfan
quote:We can always depend on some condescending Roman Catholic clanging a cheap shot at Protestants and then saying, "we should all be one" out of the other side of their mouths.
I know our protestant brothers will scoff at the rosary and probably the Eucharist too, but I know the catholics on the board may enjoy it!
1 Corinthians 13:
13 If I speak in the tongues[a] of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal . . .
4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, . . .
Posted on 3/28/24 at 10:03 am to bizeagle
quote:
It does not dishonor others, . . .
What's more dishonorable than being called "The Anti-Christ"? In fact, there are a couple of Protestant denominations which have as a part of their Confession or doctrine that The Pope is The Anti-Christ. I know that this is largely a relic of Protestantism of a 150 years ago. Largely but not completely.
There's a whole lot of Anti-Catholic bashing here on TD, and, for most of the long history of this Anti-Catholic abuse, there was no defense of Catholicism whatsoever. That has changed.
But, the anti Catholic bashing is certainly something that might "dishonor others".
Good Bible quote, by the way. Timely, too, because in the early Church, it was pretty easy for the Gentile Christians and Jewish Christians to find differences between them to fight about.
Posted on 3/28/24 at 10:19 am to Champagne
quote:who cast the first stone in this conversation? BTW, I will be attending Maundy Thursday at a protestant reformed church tonight.
But, the anti Catholic bashing is certainly something that might "dishonor others".
This post was edited on 3/28/24 at 7:34 pm
Posted on 3/28/24 at 2:05 pm to bizeagle
I was commenting on the general tenor of the Religious Threads that we have at least once a week on this August Board, which, strangely enough, is allegedly not supposed to host Threads on Religion, much less religious bashing.
That other poster's comments about the Rosary and the Eucharist were not intended to be casting a stone, if I may speak on that person's behalf.
I would like to underscore my own observation generated by the Bible quote that you shared with us - Looks like fellow Christians have had lots of issues to argue about since back at the beginning when the Greek/Gentile Christians would argue with the Jewish Christians about various things. The Church had to try to sort it out.
That other poster's comments about the Rosary and the Eucharist were not intended to be casting a stone, if I may speak on that person's behalf.
I would like to underscore my own observation generated by the Bible quote that you shared with us - Looks like fellow Christians have had lots of issues to argue about since back at the beginning when the Greek/Gentile Christians would argue with the Jewish Christians about various things. The Church had to try to sort it out.
Posted on 3/28/24 at 3:40 pm to Champagne
quote:
I was commenting on the general tenor of the Religious Threads that we have at least once a week on this August Board, which, strangely enough, is allegedly not supposed to host Threads on Religion, much less religious bashing. That other poster's comments about the Rosary and the Eucharist were not intended to be casting a stone, if I may speak on that person's behalf. I would like to underscore my own observation generated by the Bible quote that you shared with us - Looks like fellow Christians have had lots of issues to argue about since back at the beginning when the Greek/Gentile Christians would argue with the Jewish Christians about various things. The Church had to try to sort it out.
I agree and I tend to not participate in these discussions because RCs and the Orthodox denominations are Christian brothers in my reformed view as we agree on essentials. So we should not take public shots at each other and realize the big picture like CS Lewis did
Posted on 3/29/24 at 9:31 am to bizeagle
Solemn Service at 3 today. Praise to you Lord Jesus Christ!
Posted on 3/30/24 at 3:27 am to Champagne
quote:I am obeying. I'm a member of the visible Church of Jesus Christ. I have joined myself to a faithful congregation as the Scriptures command.
Christ commanded you to follow and join in Unity with His Church.
quote:I'm not sure what you are talking about but I assume this is another argument for the legitimacy of your apocryphal books that the Jews during Jesus' time didn't accept, Jesus and the Apostles never quoted authoritatively, and weren't officially codified by the RCC as authoritative Scripture that must be believed as such until over 1500 years after Christ. There were many faithful Roman Catholics who disagreed with the Apocrypha being in the same category as the rest of the Scriptures, including men all the way up until the Council of Trent, but sure, go ahead and blame Protestants for believing the same sorts of things that many Catholics believed about them.
Calvin and Luther edited the Bible, creating their "word" to replace God's Word.
quote:False characterization. They denied that the Roman Catholic church remained to be part of Christ's Church due to straying from the truth. Go read the first few chapters of the book of Revelation if you want to see where they were going with this. Essentially they believed that God had removed the Catholic Church's lampstand, as it was teaching a different gospel than that which Christ and His Apostles delivered in the Scriptures.
Then they declared Christ's Church to be fundamentally false.
So no, they didn't declare Christ's Church to be fundamentally false. They declared the Roman Catholic church to be fundamentally false.
quote:Not at all. They believed that Christ's Church never ceased to be, but that her light had nearly gone out due to false teaching in Catholicism. That light of the truth was rekindled during the Reformation, where many who were in spiritual darkness came into the light by joining themselves to Bible-believing, faithful congregations.
THEN they invented a New Church that they instituted to replace Christ's Church.
The Reformers weren't creating a new church but reforming the existing one. While you disagree that the Church needed to be reformed (or maybe you do, as the RCC did and responded to the Protestant Reformation by making some reforms of her own) or that the Protestant Reformation was a true reformation, the Reformers did not see it as a creation of a new Church. Even the word "reformation" implies a restoration of what already was, not a creation from nothing. The Reformers looked to God's Word to understand the standard for what the Church should be and teach and then sought to conform to that standard.
quote:You don't trust them because you don't actually understand what they taught, and those things you do understand, you disagree with. So yeah, it's pretty obvious why you don't trust them.
And you wonder why I don't trust Calvin and Luther? These men who erased over 1,500 years of Christendom with a New Church, created in their own vision and image?
But as I said, they didn't create a new church in their own visions. They went back to the ultimate standard for the truth of the Church, which is the very word of God, and made reforms accordingly.
quote:I don't put my faith in those men. You are accusing me of doing what Catholics do. You claim to have your faith and trust in Jesus, but you actually have an implicit faith in fallible men in the Catholic Church, and accrediting that to Jesus.
No thanks. I trust Jesus. You go ahead and place your faith and trust in Calvin, Luther, Zwingli or whomever else you choose.
My ultimate standard is the word of God, not Luther or Calvin or the Westminster Divines. I believe Luther and Calvin and the other Reformers were blessed by God and used by Him in wonderful ways, but they were not perfect as God's revealed Word in both the person of Jesus Christ and His revelation in the written Scriptures is perfect.
quote:That's the beauty of having the Scriptures--and not Luther or Calvin--as our ultimate authority: we can judge Luther and Calvin's theology according to God's standard. I don't think they had everything perfect, but they were fallible men like I am. I'm not looking to Calvin for my salvation but look to Jesus Christ alone.
Generations of Christians have been led astray by Calvin and Luther - so many of them such wonderful people. I'm sure that God will find a way to place them in Heaven.
And regarding those of us who have been "led astray" by the likes of such men, there is no hope for us according to your own beliefs. We who have examined the teachings of Catholicism and outright reject them are damned. There is more hope for the faithful Muslim than for me, according to Rome's teachings, even though I rest in Jesus Christ alone by faith for my salvation, and seek to obey Him with good works out of thankfulness. But that's the problem with believing in works righteousness: Jesus isn't enough.
This post was edited on 3/30/24 at 1:10 pm
Posted on 3/30/24 at 3:44 am to Squirrelmeister
quote:You still have mischaracterized what I believe. I don't believe that the killing of "innocent" women, children, babies, and animals is ever morally justified. God never commanded the deaths of any "innocent" people, because all people--men, women, and children--are guilty before God and all deserved destruction for our sin against our creator.
Whoops, I forgot that you believe the killing of innocent women, children, babies, and animals is not murder, when it is god-sanctioned. You believe that the killing of women, children, and babies is morally justified sometimes, particularly when “God” commands it. Please accept my apologies, now that I have corrected and clarified.
As I have said time and time again, you have no rational basis to condemn God's justice against those who hate Him. You, who believe that morality is entirely subjective, sit in judgement about such things, acting morally superior to God while you have no foundation for such a judgement to begin with.
How can YOU condemn abortion, infanticide, rape, and torture in your own worldview? You admit that morality is subjective, so the best you can do is say you don't like those things, but that there is nothing objectively immoral with those things within your own professed worldview. So I think it's pretty silly for you to act so smug regarding God's justice when you have no rational ability to condemn anything as objectively immoral.
quote:You are not correct. That's precisely why I keep correcting you about Christian theology. You twist the truth in order to make judgements that you have no rational basis to make.
Why are you accusing me of lying when you are outright admitting that I am correct.
quote:According to the Bible, that is not actually correct, which is what I'm trying to explain to you.
You want to argue a thought crime isn’t a thought crime. Call it what you want but what I said is 100% correct and you know it.
No one is condemned merely for a "thought crime" as you carelessly are saying. All are condemned apart from Christ first by original sin. Second, we are all condemned apart from Christ due to actual sins committed, both sins of commission and sins of omission. Every single person breaks the law of God every single day, even those who do believe in Jesus. So no, people are not "tortured for eternity" simply for a thought crime, because a lack of faith in Jesus is not the thing that makes all people guilty before God. It's just another sin thrown on to the pile.
However, it's only faith in Jesus as Savior that saves anyone from the punishment their sins deserve.
Your lack of clarity regarding Christian theology needs to be highlighted here, because you act as if you are an expert in these things while you can't even articulate the basics of the Christian faith.
quote:I already explained the truth of the matter. I believe that God's justice against His creation is perfectly justified, because God is holy and just, and we are sinners. You are using emotion-driven language to describe God's justice because you don't have the truth on your side.
You believe it is morally justified to torture someone for all eternity because they didn’t believe in your magic man. You don’t see it as not believing though - you consider it a rejection of truth (an argument based on pure stupidity).
Posted on 3/30/24 at 4:01 am to Squirrelmeister
quote:No, it's not. I've explained why to you.
Nope, it is a summary of your core beliefs and you know it.
quote:Again, no. You are using language uncarefully and imprecisely so that you can maximize a supposed absurdity of my beliefs. You don't seem to care for accurately portraying the Christian position, though, because it's more fun to beat up a straw man.
And it is what you believe.
quote:I'm explaining to you the Christian belief system that you seem to be quite ignorant of. You just responded with your opinion.
Except he is not revealed and everything you said is bullshite.
quote:God needs nothing. He didn't need to create us. He is jealous for His own worship, which He should be. It isn't merely about "ego" (there is no bad egotism with God who is perfect), but idolatry.
Yeah he is a very needy, jealous god, like a teenage girl. An evil, needy, jealous teenage girl.
quote:No, we don't. You are lying by misquoting me and then pretending like we agree. This is exactly why I so often call you a liar. The truth is not in you.
We agree for once
quote:Paul is talking about fallen angels; Satan and his minions. He isn't talking about "gods" as the world thinks about them. There is no god but the one God, Father, Son, and Spirit. All other beings are created beings, whether heavenly beings (angels and demons) or earthly beings.
Oh no, you ain’t getting out of this one so easy.
Ephesians 6:12
Who the hell is Paul talking about. The archons - the evil powers and forces in the sky in the heavenly realm?
And even so, you are neglecting to address the point I was making. God doesn't hate Baal or Chemosh because they don't exist. He hates worship of Baal and Chemosh because, as God, He alone is worthy of the worship of all people.
I'm not getting into this Divine Council stuff with you again. It's an unnecessary distraction and does nothing to change the theology of the Bible, monotheism, the Trinity, and all that. You seem to have latched on to Michael Heiser as a way to show that the Bible teaches something that it doesn't.
quote:God has revealed Himself through creation and through humanity, which bears His image and longs to worship, though due to sin, worships things created rather than the Creator. Your rejection of your Creator does not mean your Creator doesn't exist. You're basically a child pulling the covers of its head when its scared of the dark.
God is simply incapable of revealing himself, because he doesn’t exist.
Posted on 3/30/24 at 4:33 am to Champagne
quote:You say that, but have yet to provide the list of teachings that Jesus passed to the Church that are not recorded in the Scriptures that Christian must believe.
Why would you replace your own "contention" and judgement for that of Jesus Himself? When He left a Church, that Church embodied what He practiced and taught.
This is important, because Rome teaches that there are dogmas that Christians must believe that most Christians (in fact, most Catholics) did not believe or even hear of for most of church history. There are things that Rome teaches Christians must believe today that were utterly unheard 2000 years ago, but that Rome insists developed from those initial teachings handed down from the Apostles. All I'm saying is "prove it". Show me in history that the immaculate conception of Mary was something that Peter or Paul or one of the other Apostles gave to the church. Rome will point to Justin Marty's or Irenaeus' comparison of Mary to Eve in a singular sense (obedience to God's promises) as a proof that Mary was born without sin as Eve was, but that isn't what they were saying. Such a belief wasn't even widespread for hundreds of years after the Apostles died away. So what I'm asking for us the list of doctrines and teachings that were actually passed down to the first generation of churches by the Apostles. How do we know that when Rome makes something a dogma tomorrow, that it was something the Apostles gave to the church versus something the church made up on her own long after the Apostles? Or, do you believe in continuing revelation via the Church?
quote:The "truncated Bible", as you call it, was what was accepted by the Jews, was taught by Jesus and He held the people of Israel accountable for it, and was taught by the Apostles. That Apocrypha was rejected by at least one Pope, and many other leaders in the Roman Catholic church all the way up until the Council of Trent when it was dogmatically defined as authoritative Scripture, from which no rejection was allowed. So no, it wasn't until 1500+ years after Christ that the Apocrypha was given its authoritative status in a way that allowed for no disagreement.
Why would you replace that with a truncated Bible that Martin Luther and John Calvin edited, when a more complete Bible was officially adopted by Christendom in the 4th Century?
quote:You contrasted two sets of sources of teaching, but both sets are fallible. The church is fallible and Luther and Calvin were fallible. I don't place my faith in fallible opinions of men but only in the infallible word of God that has been preserved through the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. I don't have Calvin's Institutes bound into my Bible. I don't have Luther's Bondage of the Will included in my Bible. I have both of those resources in my library, but not in my Bible. The only infallible authority for the life and faith of the Church is the word of God, since only the Scriptures are "God-breathed".
Why do you place your faith in the opinions and doctrines of these men, Luther and Calvin, instead of the Church that Christ founded?
quote:The Catholic Bible doesn't teach the bodily assumption of Mary, does it? I know that's found in the Catholic Catechism, but the Catechism is a modern invention. Where in history can I find the bodily assumption of Mary first mentioned? If that is something that must be believed, clearly it was a doctrine provided to the Church by the Apostles. I just want to find out if that's true, and if so, what other doctrines were given to the Church by the Apostles in history, rather than through development or what is essentially new revelation.
Where is the list of things that Christ bequeathed to us that isn't in your truncated and Calvin-edited Bible? Well, I guess you'll have to read a Catholic Bible and the Catholic Catechism to find out. The list is in those places.
quote:Ironically, they did not "rip them out". Luther's translation of the Bible into German actually did include the Apocrypha. Those books were just included in a separate section. Calvin, too, interacted with the Apocrypha in a very positive way in his writings. He didn't consider it infallible Scripture, but believed it to be helpful for the Church. Don't let your ignorance of church history be a cause for slander.
It's pretty much the same Bible, except for about 7.5 books of the Old Testament. But these books were part of the Holy Bible for over Ten Centuries before Luther and Calvin ripped them out by their own Will and replaced their "Word" for God's Word.
Page 19 of 20
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News