muir
Banned
- MBTI
- INFJ
I'm not sure how exactly you are disagreeing with me here!
Questions About Christianity
- Thread starter Paladin-X
- Start date
I'm not sure how exactly you are disagreeing with me here!
Barnabas
Time Lord
- MBTI
- wiblywobly
- Enneagram
- timeywimey
It doesn't
- MBTI
- ISTJ
- Enneagram
- 9w1
What do you mean by this?
Cerce
Regular Poster
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- Type 6/Wing 5
I think he's saying 'It doesn't' because the Bible doesn't say - or give an accurate or even rough estimate - of how old the Bible is. I've done a bit of looking, and there's just no accuracy to attributing years to certain generations. From my opinion, at least.
Barnabas
Time Lord
- MBTI
- wiblywobly
- Enneagram
- timeywimey
he was looking for a point in the bible where it says the earth is such and such years old. But the Bible doesn't mention it, probably should of quoted his original question for clarity
Edit: Without doing to much digging around I want to say that the first five books of the bible are attributed to moses, which means the bible can be dated at starting somewhere during his lifetime.
- MBTI
- .
- Enneagram
- .
Dr B, would you care to comment on the mind set of those ancient folks as to why they did not mention it?
muir
Banned
- MBTI
- INFJ
Getting back to creation in Kabbalistic terms the areas of cymatics and sacred geometry might yeild some more answers relating to the 7 days of creation
This creates the seed of life which creates the flower of life which then creates the fruit of life which is the blueprint of the universe
From this is created the design for everything in existence
This creates the seed of life which creates the flower of life which then creates the fruit of life which is the blueprint of the universe
From this is created the design for everything in existence
Last edited:
Barnabas
Time Lord
- MBTI
- wiblywobly
- Enneagram
- timeywimey
If I had to guess there would be a couple of reasons, one being that they didn't keep time like we did, the second being that they probably didn't know how old the earth was.
It's kind of interesting to see how they noted important dates, take the Gospels when when the Matthew wants to give you an idea of when Jesus was born he says "During the reign of King Herod" and when they he wants to give a more specific date he note multiple known historical events to give a more precise time line.
I like Dr. B by the way, best nick name yet
Cerce
Regular Poster
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- Type 6/Wing 5
It's a common misconception that 'good people go to heaven, bad people go to hell'. Honestly, it's about a commitment, dedication, and relationship with God and Jesus Christ through the Spirit that is so hard to get down in words that you're probably either scratching your head, laughing, or preparing a rebuttal while reading this. You see, Jesus doesn't look at what you did, or how many people you saved, or how humble you were - he looks at why you did it. No, killing people in the name of God does not get you into heaven - that's not what I mean when I say he looks at the motive. I'm saying if you are following the Bible, going after God, and loving all as yourself, but keeping Him as the foremost thing in your life - there's nothing really that you've got to worry about.
The question regarding if the murderer who has converted to Christianity still going to hell is a very, very big conundrum and is often fought against even within the religion of Christianity. For example, some sects believe 'Once saved, always saved' - this means once you believe in Jesus Christ, you are saved even if you go out and become the next Adolf Hitler. A very small, yet increasingly loud, viewpoint is that we are all saved by grace - meaning we go to Heaven no matter what happens, which is complete and utter lies, in my opinion. I believe that we, as humans, can't say who is going to hell or going to heaven. God is God, he makes the choices, and all we can do is live our lives for Him for the best of our abilities. I'm not going to question the same being that both created me and destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah as to the specifics of getting into heaven. However, a few things that the Bible mentions is that it is harder for a rich man to gain entrance into heaven than it is for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, and it is also stated that whosoever believes in Jesus Christ will enter into heaven. I'm a bit tired right now, but I can pull up some scriptures if you'd like tomorrow.
Matt3737
Similes are like songs in love.
- MBTI
- INFJ
It's not a misconception when you literally restate it in such a manner, i.e. you believe in a dualistic afterlife consisting of heaven and hell.
In non-dualistic interpretations of Christianity, because God eventually defeats Satan (representing good and evil) it is claimed to be non-perfect or temporal because the two eventually become one. So I wonder if you believe hell and heaven to be co-eternal or that hell will be reconciled at some point? Otherwise, in the former case and not the latter, you are claiming dualism.
With all due respect to you young man, I take offense to your subtle arrogance when you insinuate others to be incorrect or wrong in their beliefs. I understand your beliefs will obviously contradict others' beliefs, but maybe you would be better left to let others infer those assumptions rather than asserting them. I think it great to share your beliefs with others, but trying to tell others that their beliefs are mistaken is going too far and I tend to reply in a likewise manner when I see it occur. That is the start of a debate when you try to assert something as incorrect.
To love others as you love yourself is to have equal respect for their beliefs as you do your own. Remember that, because you got defensive when people began to question you or present alternate perspectives. Christianity is a very broad religion with many denominations and many different interpretations, and it might be to your advantage to present your beliefs from your perspective (Pentecostal IIRC) and not to speak on behalf of all Christians while presenting them as being nominal Christians with mistaken interpretations.
Those who espouse the heaven/hell dictomy, in my opinion, are those who wish their will to be congruent with God's, but to the extent that they would disagree with God if he judged them incorrect. I, personally, do not believe in such a dichotomy, but if I be mistaken then I will accept the consequences.
Edit: To clarify, I am not trying to assert you are dualistic or not. I am, personally, dialetheic in my beliefs meaning I believe contradictory propositions can be equally valid. If you consider the half-filled glass as an analogy, I believe either half-filled or half-empty interpretations would be equally valid. Same way for dualistic or non-dualistic interpretations. I mean no disrepect so long as it is reciprocated to others.
Last edited:
Cerce
Regular Poster
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- Type 6/Wing 5
My apologies if I'm coming of as rude; I'm not so trying to prove others wrong as I am trying to explain myself, and doing a horrible job at it. I haven't earned, nor do I have any claim to, your respect, [MENTION=4822]Matt3737[/MENTION] . I'm speaking for myself and my viewpoint, and I tried to make that evident (stating 'In my opinion', and 'It is my belief', and 'I'm saying'). This should not be taken in any way, shape, or form as representation of all Christians everywhere, just as [MENTION=1871]muir[/MENTION] does not represent all dualists everywhere.
I was saying it is a common misconception that 'being good' gets you into heaven; I was not disputing the fact that I believe in an afterlife consisting of heaven and hell.
The reasoning behind my defensive earlier is simply because I don't consider Christianity to be dualistic, and I don't believe this thread to be put in place for people to disprove Christianity, but rather ask Christians their viewpoints on a given topic. Yes, there is Satan, and there is God - however, Satan does not exist by himself. Without God, there would not be Satan, as God created all things. Yes, there is good and evil, right and wrong - but they are not equal forces. Good always triumphs in the end, and sin will always find the sinner out. Christianity is a way of life, not a philosophic notion. It deals with an actual being that dwells within me and all believers.
I am not one to know what the eventual fate of Heaven or Hell is, as I am not God and cannot comprehend time as He does, nor do I know His plans.
I was saying it is a common misconception that 'being good' gets you into heaven; I was not disputing the fact that I believe in an afterlife consisting of heaven and hell.
The reasoning behind my defensive earlier is simply because I don't consider Christianity to be dualistic, and I don't believe this thread to be put in place for people to disprove Christianity, but rather ask Christians their viewpoints on a given topic. Yes, there is Satan, and there is God - however, Satan does not exist by himself. Without God, there would not be Satan, as God created all things. Yes, there is good and evil, right and wrong - but they are not equal forces. Good always triumphs in the end, and sin will always find the sinner out. Christianity is a way of life, not a philosophic notion. It deals with an actual being that dwells within me and all believers.
I am not one to know what the eventual fate of Heaven or Hell is, as I am not God and cannot comprehend time as He does, nor do I know His plans.
Matt3737
Similes are like songs in love.
- MBTI
- INFJ
It's okay. You're a good kid and I'd like to see you stick around for awhile.
I think you and [MENTION=1871]muir[/MENTION] were misunderstanding each other a bit. He's pretty good at being respectful of other people even if his beliefs are more esoteric than most. I disagree with a lot of the political ideology that he holds, but I think we can all agree that every religion has had those few individuals that have misused, manipulated, or misrepresented beliefs for political and/or personal gain.
He tends to carry that idea further than most of us and believes that many in authoritative positions are currently carrying out negative agendas against the wishes of those they are supposed to support/represent. I do not believe he has ever intended to misconstrue or disrespect anyone's beliefs though.
muir
Banned
- MBTI
- INFJ
No i said that christianity is non-dualism
'god' is the state of reconciled opposites. Our world is an emanation that becomes a world of duality and as such is full of tensions because of all the polarity
The aim for many is to balance out their karma to move closer to god again
First of all, hello and thank you for your questions. I am a practicing Roman Catholic, and have been my entire life. I do not find your questions to be offensive at all: honestly, I'm just glad that you asked them instead of not and forming opinions which may have been incorrect. I'll go through and try to answer each of your questions one by one. This may not be necessary for me to say, but as a practicing Catholic, I will answer your questions from the perspective of a practicing Catholic, using Catholic theology. Also, I have not gone through the entire thread, so if I repeat something that has already been said I apologize.
Anyway, to get back to your original question of why people worship Jesus and thank Him for everything and wouldn't the Father get pissed that He was being ignored, it goes back to what I said about the Trinity: the Father and the Son are one and the same while also being different. When someone is thanking Jesus, he is thanking God, and since the Father is also God the person is also thanking the Father. For most people (myself included), it is simply easier to relate to Jesus since, while being God, He is also human. Does this make sense?
Thanks again for being clear about your intentions. While I do not think the rationale behind Catholic beliefs can be disproved (why would I be a Catholic if I thought that? Hence why relativism doesn't make any sense to me, but that's another topic entirely), I will say that there are aspects of Catholicism which transcend reason, and hence which cannot be proved/disproved by the human intellect. Again, this is not to say that we should not be asking these questions, but simply that there is a reason why it is called the Christian/Catholic faith. I hope everything I said makes some sort of sense, and I will try to reply in a reasonable time, but please be patient with me: I'm not online very often.
I think this is probably one of the most misunderstood aspects of Catholicism. First of all, we do not believe that the wine and the bread simply represent Christ's body and blood: we believe that they ARE His body and blood. However, the Eucharist (what we call the bread and the wine when it turns into the Body and Blood of Christ during the Mass) is more than Christ's Body and Blood: it is His Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity. In other words, the Eucharist IS Jesus Christ, both His full humanity and His full divinity. In short, the Eucharist is God since Christ is God. So when we eat the Body of Christ and drink His Blood we believe that God Himself is coming into our bodies and souls. This is our 'daily bread' which Christ mentions in The Lord's Prayer (Our Father); it is the manna which gives us the sustenance we need in our daily lives; God Himself is our food and our drink. This is mind-boggling on many accounts, one of which is how humble God shows Himself to be. At first He came down and "took the form of a slave, being born in the likeness of men," to quote St. Paul in his letter to the Philippians, but then He goes even farther, taking the form of bread and wine, two of the simplest kinds of food and which, in order to be made, must be crushed and ground over and over again (ground wheat to make the bread, crushed grapes to make the wine). This also has connections to the Crucifixion, where Christ was literally crushed in the most brutal of fashions, ultimately (to finish the thought of St. Paul from the Philippians), humbling "himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross." We celebrate the Eucharist, and consume the Eucharist, to receive the spiritual nourishment that we need and to commemorate Christ's passion and death, which led to the glory of the resurrection from the dead. There's a lot more to it (I'm still constantly learning about more connections!) but does what I said make sense?
An important tenant of most branches of Christianity is the belief in the Trinity. In brief, the Mystery of the Trinity states that there are three Divine Persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit), but they are one God. However, this does not mean that without the other two Persons of the Trinity, the third Person is not God: He is still God. The Father, in and of Himself, is fully God; the Son, in and of Himself, is fully God, and the Holy Spirit, in and of Himself, is fully God. At the same time, however, all of them together do not make some 'super-God', but are still fully God, just as they are in and of themselves. It is a very confusing dogma, and one which many of the greatest minds in the Church have tackled (St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Patrick, St. Gregory Nazianzus, St. Gregory of Nyssa, and St. Basil the Great, to name a few), but it is not something which, I think, we will ever be able to fully comprehend. What comes to my mind here is an experience that St. Augustine had. If you're not familiar with St. Augustine, he was a bishop in Northern Africa who lived from the mid 4th to the early 5th centuries. He had a great philosophical education, and to this day is considered one of the greatest minds the Catholic Church has ever known. Anyway, one day, St. Augustine was walking along the beach and he came up to a young boy who was running back and forth between the ocean and a hole he had dug in the sand, emptying water from the ocean into the hole in the sand with a bucket. St. Augustine asked the boy what he was doing, and he replied that he was putting the ocean into the hole. Obviously, the little boy was never going to achieve his goal: the hole in the sand simply would not be able to hold the entire ocean! Now imagine our minds as the hole in the sand, and God as the ocean: we can run back and forth, trying to fill our minds with the knowledge of God as much as we can, but there's always going to be more for us to learn. This isn't to say that we shouldn't try and learn more about God, though: far from it! God gave us our intellects for a reason, and it would be a terrible misfortune not to use them! But we also need to be aware that God is greater than we could ever possibly imagine.
Anyway, to get back to your original question of why people worship Jesus and thank Him for everything and wouldn't the Father get pissed that He was being ignored, it goes back to what I said about the Trinity: the Father and the Son are one and the same while also being different. When someone is thanking Jesus, he is thanking God, and since the Father is also God the person is also thanking the Father. For most people (myself included), it is simply easier to relate to Jesus since, while being God, He is also human. Does this make sense?
Some did view Christ's miracles as witchcraft of the devil. However, to quote from the Gospel of Matthew, chapter 7 verses 15-20, "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thorns, or figs from thistles? So, every sound tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears evil fruit. A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will know them by their fruits." What were the fruits that Christ brought wherever He went? Love, peace, mercy, justice. Such things the devil cannot provide.
I can only speak for Catholicism here, as I am Catholic and have not gone to many non-Catholic services, but within the Catholic tradition there are many Jewish traditions that have been carried over. The most obvious example is what Christians call the Old Testament: the Old Testament is the entirety of the Jewish Scriptures. These are still regularly used in Christian services of all kinds, and what is written in the Old Testament is conceived as being fulfilled in the New Testament by the coming of Christ. Therefore, what Jewish traditions were changed by the Christians were not just changed for the heck of it: specific traditions were changed as a fulfillment of older traditions. For example, the Sabbath day. Jews understood the Sabbath day as beginning at sundown the day before the Sabbath: Catholics can go to Mass Saturday evening and fulfill their Sunday obligation. The Sabbath day itself was moved from Saturday to Sunday, since tradition holds that Sunday was the day Christ rose from the dead, but the same principle applies to it beginning the evening before. Another tradition that has carried over is the different times for prayer during the day. Traditionally, Jews would pray in the morning, at midday, and in the evening, mainly reading the psalms and canticles from other books in the Old Testament. Catholics, Orthodox, and perhaps some denominations continue this practice in what is commonly known as the Liturgy of the Hours, which all Catholic priests and religious are required to pray everyday, and which the lay faithful are encouraged to pray. The Liturgy of the Hours, after the Mass, is the official prayer of the Catholic Church.
In order to understand the crucifixion, you need to understand the reason behind it. God is both perfectly just and perfectly merciful. When sin first entered the world through the free choice of Adam and Eve, they put an infinite distance between humanity and God, for in order to disobey One Who is infinite (God) one must choose to disobey infinitely (sin). Sin, by its nature, is a turning away from God. Adam and Eve, as our first parents, had the choice to either stay and follow God, or turn and follow their own designs, and they chose the latter. In doing so, they also condemned the rest of the human race to death (the ultimate effect of sin since God is the source of our life), as well as to have a tendency to turn away from God (what is known as concupiscence). This combination of effects, in short, is what is known as Original Sin. Because the Original Sin was an act against an infinite being (God) the effect that it has is infinite. Now, humans, by our nature, are finite. As such, there is nothing that we can do which would be able to restore our good standing with God since sin put us an infinite distance away from Him. BUT God did not abandon us like we did Him. Because He is perfectly just, there needed to be a just recompense for the sin, which could only be given by a human, which, because of our nature, we could not do; because He is perfectly merciful, He sent His Only-Begotten Son, Who took on a human nature, in order to bring humanity back into communion with God by means of the Cross and Resurrection. God sent His Son out of love, and the Son, our of love for His Father and for humanity, willingly laid down His life. Again, the Father and the Son are one, the Father's will is the Son's will. Does that make sense?
People have claimed to be the son of God, or God Himself, throughout the centuries. The Caesars of the Roman Empire were considered to be gods by their subjects, with the exception of the Jews and the Christians. Side note: One of the reasons the Christians were so brutally persecuted in the first centuries of Christianity was because, while the Jews had an exemption from worshiping Caesar, when the Jews and Christians officially split and became separate religions the same exemption did not apply to Christianity. Anyway, I think it all comes back to what I said earlier about by their fruits you will know them. Christ did heal the sick, raise the dead, return sight to the blind, speech to the mute, hearing to the deaf, etc. etc. Christ was not schizophrenic: He did not have multiple personalities. Yes, He has a divine and a human nature, but He is one Divine Person. This is known as the Hypostatic Union.
This goes back to the perfectly just and perfectly merciful answer I gave above about the Cross. If you need me to explain it again in this context, please let me know and I will do my best. Concerning the crusades, they were a sad part in the history of the Church, to be sure, but from my understanding they were done under a misguided sense of zeal for God, to the point of killing others for Him. This is not at all what Christianity teaches, and the Catholic Church has officially apologized for the Crusades.
Thanks again for being clear about your intentions. While I do not think the rationale behind Catholic beliefs can be disproved (why would I be a Catholic if I thought that? Hence why relativism doesn't make any sense to me, but that's another topic entirely), I will say that there are aspects of Catholicism which transcend reason, and hence which cannot be proved/disproved by the human intellect. Again, this is not to say that we should not be asking these questions, but simply that there is a reason why it is called the Christian/Catholic faith. I hope everything I said makes some sort of sense, and I will try to reply in a reasonable time, but please be patient with me: I'm not online very often.
Last edited:
Cerce
Regular Poster
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- Type 6/Wing 5
That guy knows a heckuva lot more about what he's talking about than I do xD
The answers he provided are probably the most researched and proven Biblically valid from what I have seen of this thread; interpretations are different for every sect/branch of Christianity, but we all pretty much agree on the basics of what he stated. The only thing people might disagree about, from what I can see, would be the interpretation of communion.
The answers he provided are probably the most researched and proven Biblically valid from what I have seen of this thread; interpretations are different for every sect/branch of Christianity, but we all pretty much agree on the basics of what he stated. The only thing people might disagree about, from what I can see, would be the interpretation of communion.
- MBTI
- INTJ - A
- Enneagram
- 10000
1st point: I don't know.
I think that the estimate is how long it is since Adam and Eve; together with the assumption that creation took less than a week.
I guess you could say that the earth is 6000 years old with the following conditions:
1. That Adam and Eve were the first humans: that is primates with a spiritual/immortal soul.
2. That they lived about 6000 years ago.
3. That this planet is referred to as Earth only since humans have inhabited it.
But since the '6000 year old earth' is not an official dogma/doctrine - I don't think it's an important point.
- MBTI
- INTJ - A
- Enneagram
- 10000
Question to non-Catholics:
Who determines what your official beliefs/dogmas/doctrines/sources are?
eg. Who determines that belief in the Blessed Trinity is an article of your faith? (Not explicit in Scripture)?
eg. Who determines which books are included in your Bible? (Why the epistle of St James isn't included)?
etc. etc.
Who determines what your official beliefs/dogmas/doctrines/sources are?
eg. Who determines that belief in the Blessed Trinity is an article of your faith? (Not explicit in Scripture)?
eg. Who determines which books are included in your Bible? (Why the epistle of St James isn't included)?
etc. etc.