Relationship vs Religion

Wyote said:
81hbTpUm6EL._SX385_.jpg
Click to expand...
Hahahahahaha!!!!

 
I couldn't have said it as well.

"This is the first error. Christianity is not a religion. It is a faith. No works necessary, only that we know that we "All fall short of the glory of God", so that we cannot boast ourselves above others, which leads us to Mercy and forgiveness, and ultimately Love.

No other system can achieve this. There is no other choice, yet people still think they can do it better another way."
 
just me said:
I couldn't have said it as well.

"This is the first error. Christianity is not a religion. It is a faith. No works necessary, only that we know that we "All fall short of the glory of God", so that we cannot boast ourselves above others, which leads us to Mercy and forgiveness, and ultimately Love.

No other system can achieve this. There is no other choice, yet people still think they can do it better another way."
Click to expand...
Appreciate the affirmation. I'm not sure if you will want to be part of this mailstrom?

Best thread yet, IMHO. Although I'm not one to boast. o.o
 
I am currently delighted to watch. This may change. I am reminded of survival.
A Descent Into The Maelstrom by Edgar Allan Poe

12 And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves,

13 And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves.
 
Last edited:
just me said:
I am currently delighted to watch. This may change. I am reminded of survival.
A Descent Into The Maelstrom by Edgar Allan Poe

12 And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves,

13 And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves.
Click to expand...

That is one of my favorites. I don't like the common understanding, that Jesus was always pious and peaceful. He wasn't... Not by a long shot.
 
My favorite part in the whole of the Bible is Acts 7, where Steven lays it down to the religious leaders, and exposes their hypocrisy with their very own words. Even knowing that they didn't want to hear it, and knowing that it might cost him his life - which it did.
 
wiredandwound said:
Are you saying that a definition built on a solid foundation of context is problematic. I do not understand what you mean by "standard".
Click to expand...
No, that's perfectly fine.

Standard is the dictionary definition. (Language is fluid just means language is alive. The meaning of words is derived from consensus; what we agree upon the word means within a given context.)

It seems you are arguing that "just because people use the dictionary definition of religion in churches, does not mean that fits my personal definition of religion, and my personal definition is the real definition. Therefore it's not a religion."

It's problematic at best and disingenuous at worst.
 
Lady Jolanda said:
It's problematic at best and disingenuous at worst.
Click to expand...
I have know idea where that is coming from. How about that I clarify my definition at the beginning of the argument, for the sake of knowing that people are incapable of making their own contextual connections? would that be more honest?

Your argument is contentious and disingenuous at worst.
 
Lady Jolanda said:
I'm not here to cause disagreement / start fights Wired. I'm sorry you feel that way.

Edit: Also yes, that's honest.
Click to expand...
I owe you y apologies. Still responding too soon. I get your point, but it came off very negative to me. Just had a convo with wyote, this morning about this, as a general discussion. On-line interpretation is horrible at best, I'm afraid.
 
wiredandwound said:
There you go confusing the words faith and religion.
Click to expand...
I find it very odd that you first claim the sole authority to define these words, and then criticise people when they prefer to use more common definitions.

Your usage of 'faith' and 'religion' is idiolectic; you can't criticise us for not agreeing to use your own personal language.

The Definition of Religion - Wikipedia

I know from my own work on the medieval Church that the term religio was not used in the modern sense of 'an organised spiritual system of beliefs and practices' or whatever, but referred more to adherence to the 'rules' of Christianity.
 
Deleted member 16771 said:
I find it very odd that you first claim the sole authority to define these words, and then criticise people when they prefer to use more common definitions.

Your usage of 'faith' and 'religion' is idiolectic; you can't criticise us for not agreeing to use your own personal language.

The Definition of Religion - Wikipedia

I know from my own work on the medieval Church that the term religio was not used in the modern sense of 'an organised spiritual system of beliefs and practices' or whatever, but referred more to adherence to the 'rules' of Christianity.
Click to expand...
I get what you mean. But how many comments do I have to make before people stop asking "what definition are you using"? People spend too much effort on concentrating on the definition of one word, which I was gladly providing context for. My take on this argument is a common one, and that is that when people want to disagree with something, but are not sure how, they find some semantic issue to focus on.
 
wiredandwound said:
I owe you y apologies. Still responding too soon. I get your point, but it came off very negative to me. Just had a convo with wyote, this morning about this, as a general discussion. On-line interpretation is horrible at best, I'm afraid.
Click to expand...
It's all good.

I know I can unintentionally come across as negative and rude, so for that I apologize as well.

Let's get back to the subject at hand, ok? :)
 
wiredandwound said:
I get what you mean. But how many comments do I have to make before people stop asking "what definition are you using"? People spend too much effort on concentrating on the definition of one word, which I was gladly providing context for. My take on this argument is a common one, and that is that when people want to disagree with something, but are not sure how, they find some semantic issue to focus on.
Click to expand...
But the semantic issue is the core of your argument :neutral:
 
wiredandwound said:
I owe you y apologies. Still responding too soon. I get your point, but it came off very negative to me. Just had a convo with wyote, this morning about this, as a general discussion. On-line interpretation is horrible at best, I'm afraid.
Click to expand...

This makes it sound as if you were the one making this point, when in fact it was me. Though we both agreed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top