Too much trash talk against Christianity

Turtwig

Blackgator wrote: »

What about the belittling of peoples football teams, political leanings, favorite band? That's all okay, but don't have a go at religion, that's sacred. Utter nonsense. If their fault is so fragile that it can't stand up to a little criticism then that's something they need to have a look at.

Flying spaghetti monsters on the other hand, they deserve respect from all and should be worshipped without question.

You're in the Christianity forum. By all means dislike cricket but don't go into a cricket club telling the members how much you hate cricket and expect a warm reception. Constructive criticism on the other hand... Charter exists in this forum for a reason. Please adhere to it.

Brasros

Maeve Quick Hood wrote:

( primary school shouldn't have christian based ethos ) ( census discussion about whether you are christian or not ) ( non religious funerals ) ( the good friday drinking ban )

And what is wrong with that.

Marhay70

There are c.6 billion people on this planet currently, about half of whom belong to one of the Abrahamic faiths. Christianity insists that salvation is dependent on total immersion in the Christian faith, so we can write off the Muslims and the Jews, leaving about 2 billion Christians. By definition then, two thirds of the current population of the earth are bound for where? Add to that the fact that Christianity has only existed for 2,000 of the 200,000 years that man has existed and you get a lot of people heading for eternity in limbo for the simple reason that they have not been exposed to Christianity, not because they have rejected it or failed to adhere to it.
I am fortunate or unfortunate enough, depending on your perspective, to have been born with a Mr Spock like approach to life i.e. I can't abide illogicality or irrationality and given that God has been around for the entire period of Earth's existence then it seems illogical, for a loving and forgiving God to allow such a situation to pertain. So, what is the answer, does God operate separate heavens for good people who are not Christians? If so then one of the basic tenets of Christianity is a sham.
I don't write this as a slur on Christianity but purely through curiosity and I rarely entertain pie in the sky explanations of anything.

looksee

Only a person who believes in the Christian God and accepts him can go to heaven. I think that is the general idea, right? Hell is also a Christian concept, so if you do not accept the Christian God you cannot go to hell. Hell can only exist if you believe in it. If other people believe that non-believers go to hell, then that is their problem. And why would the devil be doing God's dirty work anyway?

Marhay70

I wasn't suggesting people would go to hell, I was asking where they would go.
I don't accept hell as a concept as basically, in the scheme of things, it doesn't make sense but if we're to believe the bible God is inclined to be irrational and impulsive.
My thoughts often stray to a documentary I once saw on a tribe of people in Papua New Guinea and who had only recently come in contact with the outside world.
They were totally at one with nature, there was no crime, no misogyny, no wanton waste, no malice and I remember thinking this must have been what it was like in the era of the hunter gatherers. Why would any God condemn such people to hell?

Hoagy

Marhay70 wrote: »

I wasn't suggesting people would go to hell, I was asking where they would go.
I don't accept hell as a concept as basically, in the scheme of things, it doesn't make sense but if we're to believe the bible God is inclined to be irrational and impulsive.
My thoughts often stray to a documentary I once saw on a tribe of people in Papua New Guinea and who had only recently come in contact with the outside world.
They were totally at one with nature, there was no crime, no misogyny, no wanton waste, no malice and I remember thinking this must have been what it was like in the era of the hunter gatherers. Why would any God condemn such people to hell?

Benny has been speaking about this recently:

Benedict XVI: There is no doubt that on this point we are faced with a profound evolution of dogma. While the fathers and theologians of the Middle Ages could still be of the opinion that, essentially, the whole human race had become Catholic and that paganism existed now only on the margins, the discovery of the New World at the beginning of the modern era radically changed perspectives. In the second half of the last century it has been fully affirmed the understanding that God cannot let go to perdition all the unbaptized and that even a purely natural happiness for them does not represent a real answer to the question of human existence. If it is true that the great missionaries of the 16th century were still convinced that those who are not baptized are forever lost – and this explains their missionary commitment – in the Catholic Church after the Second Vatican Council that conviction was finally abandoned.

From this came a deep double crisis. On the one hand this seems to remove any motivation for a future missionary commitment. Why should one try to convince the people to accept the Christian faith when they can be saved even without it? But also for Christians an issue emerged: the obligatory nature of the faith and its way of life began to seem uncertain and problematic. If there are those who can save themselves in other ways, it is not clear, in the final analysis, why the Christian himself is bound by the requirements of the Christian faith and its morals. If faith and salvation are no longer interdependent, faith itself becomes unmotivated.

Full text is here

love humanity

looksee wrote: »

Only a person who believes in the Christian God and accepts him can go to heaven. I think that is the general idea, right? Hell is also a Christian concept, so if you do not accept the Christian God you cannot go to hell. Hell can only exist if you believe in it. If other people believe that non-believers go to hell, then that is their problem. And why would the devil be doing God's dirty work anyway?

SOURCE: oca.org/orthodoxy/the-orthodox-faith/spirituality/the-kingdom-of-heaven/heaven-and-hell

The Kingdom of heaven is already in the midst of those who live the spiritual life. What the spiritual person knows in the Holy Spirit, in Christ and the Church, will come with power and glory for all men to behold at the end of the ages.

The final coming of Christ will be the judgment of all men. His very presence will be the judgment. Now men can live without the love of Christ in their lives. They can exist as if there were no God, no Christ, no Spirit, no Church, no spiritual life. At the end of the ages this will no longer be possible. All men will have to behold the Face of Him who “for us men and our salvation came down from heaven and was incarnate . . . who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried . . .” (Nicene Creed). All will have to look at Him whom they have crucified by their sins: Him “who was dead and is alive again” (Rev 1.17–18).

For those who love the Lord, His Presence will be infinite joy, paradise and eternal life. For those who hate the Lord, the same Presence will be infinite torture, hell and eternal death. The reality for both the saved and the damned will be exactly the same when Christ “comes in glory, and all angels with Him,” so that “God may be all in all” (1 Cor 15–28). Those who have God as their “all” within this life will finally have divine fulfillment and life. For those whose “all” is themselves and this world, the “all” of God will be their torture, their punishment and their death. And theirs will be “weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Mt 8.21, et al.).

The Son of Man will send His angels and they will gather out of His kingdom all causes of sin and all evil doers, and throw them into the furnace of fire; there men will weep and gnash their teeth. Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the Kingdom of their Father (Mt 13.41–43).

According to the saints, the “fire” that will consume sinners at the coming of the Kingdom of God is the same “fire” that will shine with splendor in the saints. It is the “fire” of God’s love; the “fire” of God Himself who is Love. “For our God is a consuming fire” (Heb 12.29) who “dwells in unapproachable light” (1 Tim 6.16). For those who love God and who love all creation in Him, the “consuming fire” of God will be radiant bliss and unspeakable delight. For those who do not love God, and who do not love at all, this same “consuming fire” will be the cause of their “weeping” and their “gnashing of teeth.”

Thus it is the Church’s spiritual teaching that God does not punish man by some material fire or physical torment. God simply reveals Himself in the risen Lord Jesus in such a glorious way that no man can fail to behold His glory. It is the presence of God’s splendid glory and love that is the scourge of those who reject its radiant power and light.

. . . those who find themselves in hell will be chastised by the scourge of love. How cruel and bitter this torment of love will be! For those who understand that they have sinned against love, undergo no greater suffering than those produced by the most fearful tortures. The sorrow which takes hold of the heart, which has sinned against love, is more piercing than any other pain. It is not right to say that the sinners in hell are deprived of the love of God . . . But love acts in two ways, as suffering of the reproved, and as joy in the blessed! (Saint Isaac of Syria, Mystic Treatises).

This teaching is found in many spiritual writers and saints: Saint Maximus the Confessor, the novelist Fyodor Dostoevsky. At the end of the ages God’s glorious love is revealed for all to behold in the face of Christ. Man’s eternal destiny—heaven or hell, salvation or damnation—depends solely on his response to this love.

Timberrrrrrrr

love humanity wrote: »

SOURCE: oca.org/orthodoxy/the-orthodox-faith/spirituality/the-kingdom-of-heaven/heaven-and-hell

The Kingdom of heaven is already in the midst of those who live the spiritual life. What the spiritual person knows in the Holy Spirit, in Christ and the Church, will come with power and glory for all men to behold at the end of the ages.

The final coming of Christ will be the judgment of all men. His very presence will be the judgment. Now men can live without the love of Christ in their lives. They can exist as if there were no God, no Christ, no Spirit, no Church, no spiritual life. At the end of the ages this will no longer be possible. All men will have to behold the Face of Him who “for us men and our salvation came down from heaven and was incarnate . . . who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried . . .” (Nicene Creed). All will have to look at Him whom they have crucified by their sins: Him “who was dead and is alive again” (Rev 1.17–18).

For those who love the Lord, His Presence will be infinite joy, paradise and eternal life. For those who hate the Lord, the same Presence will be infinite torture, hell and eternal death. The reality for both the saved and the damned will be exactly the same when Christ “comes in glory, and all angels with Him,” so that “God may be all in all” (1 Cor 15–28). Those who have God as their “all” within this life will finally have divine fulfillment and life. For those whose “all” is themselves and this world, the “all” of God will be their torture, their punishment and their death. And theirs will be “weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Mt 8.21, et al.).

The Son of Man will send His angels and they will gather out of His kingdom all causes of sin and all evil doers, and throw them into the furnace of fire; there men will weep and gnash their teeth. Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the Kingdom of their Father (Mt 13.41–43).

According to the saints, the “fire” that will consume sinners at the coming of the Kingdom of God is the same “fire” that will shine with splendor in the saints. It is the “fire” of God’s love; the “fire” of God Himself who is Love. “For our God is a consuming fire” (Heb 12.29) who “dwells in unapproachable light” (1 Tim 6.16). For those who love God and who love all creation in Him, the “consuming fire” of God will be radiant bliss and unspeakable delight. For those who do not love God, and who do not love at all, this same “consuming fire” will be the cause of their “weeping” and their “gnashing of teeth.”

Thus it is the Church’s spiritual teaching that God does not punish man by some material fire or physical torment. God simply reveals Himself in the risen Lord Jesus in such a glorious way that no man can fail to behold His glory. It is the presence of God’s splendid glory and love that is the scourge of those who reject its radiant power and light.

. . . those who find themselves in hell will be chastised by the scourge of love. How cruel and bitter this torment of love will be! For those who understand that they have sinned against love, undergo no greater suffering than those produced by the most fearful tortures. The sorrow which takes hold of the heart, which has sinned against love, is more piercing than any other pain. It is not right to say that the sinners in hell are deprived of the love of God . . . But love acts in two ways, as suffering of the reproved, and as joy in the blessed! (Saint Isaac of Syria, Mystic Treatises).

This teaching is found in many spiritual writers and saints: Saint Maximus the Confessor, the novelist Fyodor Dostoevsky. At the end of the ages God’s glorious love is revealed for all to behold in the face of Christ. Man’s eternal destiny—heaven or hell, salvation or damnation—depends solely on his response to this love.

That's one of how many Christian religions interpretations though?

love humanity

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

That's one of how many Christian religions interpretations though?

Well it's from the unchanged church before the Great Schism, also one of the early church Fathers, Saint Isaac of Syria talks of it.

Speedwell

love humanity wrote: »

Well it's from the unchanged church before the Great Schism, also one of the early church Fathers, Saint Isaac of Syria talks of it.

So, in software dev terms, it's deprecated?

love humanity

Speedwell wrote: »

So, in software dev terms, it's deprecated?

This forum is full of wise cracks and trolls... but nevertheless... I will answer again...

This is the Orthodox teaching of what is meant by Heaven and Hell, any other interpretations after the Great Schism shouldn't differ on this. It is best to stick with the apostolic Church and the early Church fathers as a solid foundation.

Delirium

MOD NOTE

Please don't accuse others of being trolls.

If you see a problematic post/trolling, please report it.

Thanks for your attention.

love humanity

Delirium wrote: »

MOD NOTE

Please don't accuse others of being trolls.

If you see a problematic post/trolling, please report it.

Thanks for your attention.

I am new to boards. Why is mocking, bashing, ridiculing of Christianity allowed on this thread? I can understand a nice discussion as I have offline with my friends who are atheists but this just comes across as childish here at times.

Timberrrrrrrr

love humanity wrote: »

This forum is full of wise cracks and trolls... but nevertheless... I will answer again...

This is the Orthodox teaching of what is meant by Heaven and Hell, any other interpretations after the Great Schism shouldn't differ on this. It is best to stick with the apostolic Church and the early Church fathers as a solid foundation.

So yours is the only true faith and any other teaching is wrong?

love humanity

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

So yours is the only true faith and any other teaching is wrong?

You want to know about Hell, now you have an answer you don't like you change course. How convenient?

Timberrrrrrrr

love humanity wrote: »

You want to know about Hell, now you have an answer you don't like you change course. How convenient?

No

We have the answer according.to.your faiths take on it.

Are all other (different) teachings wrong?

love humanity

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

No

We have the answer according.to.your faiths take on it.

Are all other (different) teachings wrong?

What are the other "faiths" i think you mean denominations, take on it?

Timberrrrrrrr

love humanity wrote: »

What are the other "faiths" i think you mean denominations, take on it?

Tom ate oh

Tom ar to

Are the other faiths (*denominations*) wrong because their perception of hell Is different?

What will happen to all those jesus lovin "god" fearing Christians who don't subscribe to your particular brand of Christianity?

Delirium

love humanity wrote: »

I am new to boards. Why is mocking, bashing, ridiculing of Christianity allowed on this thread? I can understand a nice discussion as I have offline with my friends who are atheists but this just comes across as childish here at times.

MOD NOTE

If you see such posts, report them please.

Also, in future if you wish to question a mod instruction, feel free to PM the mod. Please don't do so on-thread.

Thanks for your attention.

love humanity

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Tom ate oh

Tom ar to

Are the other faiths (*denominations*) wrong because their perception of hell Is different?

What will happen to all those jesus lovin "god" fearing Christians who don't subscribe to your particular brand of Christianity?

What are their teachings? Do they follow the Bible and Church Fathers?

Timberrrrrrrr

love humanity wrote: »

What are their teachings? Do they follow the Bible and Church Fathers?

Which version of the bible? It's been rewritten, translated, rewritten and edited so many times no one knows what the original says anymore.

Also which church fathers?

love humanity

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Which version of the bible? It's been rewritten, translated, rewritten and edited so many times no one knows what the original says anymore.

Also which church fathers?

Again off topic but I will answer about the Holy Bible to start a new topic if you like?

The New Testament not only has 5,500+ manuscripts that amalgamate into a consistent original inerrant book (yes, we have the original New Testament, in its 28th edition due to further manuscript evidence that archaeologists are showcasing: nestle-aland.com/en/home/ ), but we have patristic sources that refer to any given New Testament verse over 1,000,000+ times (quite literally), in their writings (ranging from the early 2nd century down to the 6th century). If I wanted to have an "original" New Testament, purely from the patristic sources, I would have the 28th edition critical text, with one small minor difference: it would be lacking only six verses (and these aren't theologically driven, as it's nothing important since the texts lacking are scene descriptions, like the mention of green grass in Mark 6:39).

love humanity

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

No

We have the answer according.to.your faiths take on it.

Are all other (different) teachings wrong?

While we see ourselves as the "Royal Priesthood", we do not judge other Christians as Hell-bound, because we have a God who desires the Salvation of all. In Mark 9, we read,
Now John answered Him, saying, “Teacher, we saw someone who does not follow us casting out demons in Your name, and we forbade him because he does not follow us.”
But Jesus said, “Do not forbid him, for no one who works a miracle in My name can soon afterward speak evil of Me. For he who is not against us is on our side. For whoever gives you a cup of water to drink in My name, because you belong to Christ, assuredly, I say to you, he will by no means lose his reward.​
This man was clearly not of the assembly of the Apostles (the Orthodox Church), but our Lord says not only not to forbid him from doing his work, but also that he will not lose his (eternal) reward.

Timberrrrrrrr

love humanity wrote: »

Again off topic but I will answer about the Holy Bible to start a new topic if you like?

The New Testament not only has 5,500+ manuscripts that amalgamate into a consistent original inerrant book (yes, we have the original New Testament, in its 28th edition due to further manuscript evidence that archaeologists are showcasing: nestle-aland.com/en/home/ ), but we have patristic sources that refer to any given New Testament verse over 1,000,000+ times (quite literally), in their writings (ranging from the early 2nd century down to the 6th century). If I wanted to have an "original" New Testament, purely from the patristic sources, I would have the 28th edition critical text, with one small minor difference: it would be lacking only six verses (and these aren't theologically driven, as it's nothing important since the texts lacking are scene descriptions, like the mention of green grass in Mark 6:39).

The sinai bible (oldest known to date) h's 14,800 differences to today's bible.

The church destroyed 2 second century Jewish books that is said to have held the true name of "christ".

In 1607 47 men took 2 years and 9 months to rewrite the bible, ordered by King James and issued with a set of rules yet this is the bible mostly used for Christian teaching.

The "bible" used today is 5 linguistic removes from the original so really what you are basing your whole faith on is a book that has been translated, edited, rewritten to a specific set of rules but still believe is genuine

Timberrrrrrrr

Also you said

love humanity wrote: »

What are their teachings? Do they follow the Bible and Church Fathers?

Which church fathers should we listen to?

Brasros

Marhay70 wrote:

There are c.6 billion people on this planet currently, about half of whom belong to one of the Abrahamic faiths. Christianity insists that salvation is dependent on total immersion in the Christian faith, so we can write off the Muslims and the Jews, leaving about 2 billion Christians. By definition then, two thirds of the current population of the earth are bound for where? Add to that the fact that Christianity has only existed for 2,000 of the 200,000 years that man has existed and you get a lot of people heading for eternity in limbo for the simple reason that they have not been exposed to Christianity, not because they have rejected it or failed to adhere to it. I am fortunate or unfortunate enough, depending on your perspective, to have been born with a Mr Spock like approach to life i.e. I can't abide illogicality or irrationality and given that God has been around for the entire period of Earth's existence then it seems illogical, for a loving and forgiving God to allow such a situation to pertain. So, what is the answer, does God operate separate heavens for good people who are not Christians? If so then one of the basic tenets of Christianity is a sham. I don't write this as a slur on Christianity but purely through curiosity and I rarely entertain pie in the sky explanations of anything.

Marhay70 wrote:

There are c.6 billion people on this planet currently, about half of whom belong to one of the Abrahamic faiths. Christianity insists that salvation is dependent on total immersion in the Christian faith, so we can write off the Muslims and the Jews, leaving about 2 billion Christians. By definition then, two thirds of the current population of the earth are bound for where? Add to that the fact that Christianity has only existed for 2,000 of the 200,000 years that man has existed and you get a lot of people heading for eternity in limbo for the simple reason that they have not been exposed to Christianity, not because they have rejected it or failed to adhere to it. I am fortunate or unfortunate enough, depending on your perspective, to have been born with a Mr Spock like approach to life i.e. I can't abide illogicality or irrationality and given that God has been around for the entire period of Earth's existence then it seems illogical, for a loving and forgiving God to allow such a situation to pertain. So, what is the answer, does God operate separate heavens for good people who are not Christians? If so then one of the basic tenets of Christianity is a sham. I don't write this as a slur on Christianity but purely through curiosity and I rarely entertain pie in the sky explanations of anything.

Marhay70 wrote:

There are c.6 billion people on this planet currently, about half of whom belong to one of the Abrahamic faiths. Christianity insists that salvation is dependent on total immersion in the Christian faith, so we can write off the Muslims and the Jews, leaving about 2 billion Christians. By definition then, two thirds of the current population of the earth are bound for where? Add to that the fact that Christianity has only existed for 2,000 of the 200,000 years that man has existed and you get a lot of people heading for eternity in limbo for the simple reason that they have not been exposed to Christianity, not because they have rejected it or failed to adhere to it. I am fortunate or unfortunate enough, depending on your perspective, to have been born with a Mr Spock like approach to life i.e. I can't abide illogicality or irrationality and given that God has been around for the entire period of Earth's existence then it seems illogical, for a loving and forgiving God to allow such a situation to pertain. So, what is the answer, does God operate separate heavens for good people who are not Christians? If so then one of the basic tenets of Christianity is a sham. I don't write this as a slur on Christianity but purely through curiosity and I rarely entertain pie in the sky explanations of anything.

This can be applied if one believes in God, for me I see no evidence that there is one.
In saying this I have no problem in what one believes in, I just don't agree on believes being push on others.

love humanity

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

The sinai bible (oldest known to date) h's 14,800 differences to today's bible.

The church destroyed 2 second century Jewish books that is said to have held the true name of "christ".

In 1607 47 men took 2 years and 9 months to rewrite the bible, ordered by King James and issued with a set of rules yet this is the bible mostly used for Christian teaching.

The "bible" used today is 5 linguistic removes from the original so really what you are basing your whole faith on is a book that has been translated, edited, rewritten to a specific set of rules but still believe is genuine

Ok good. Thank you. Let's begin...

The first question I have is simply this:

I am curious as to why are you calling the Codex Sinaiticus the Bible?

Timberrrrrrrr

love humanity wrote: »

Ok good. Thank you. Let's begin...

The first question I have is simply this:

I am curious as to why are you calling the Codex Sinaiticus the Bible?

Because it's a manuscript of the bible, the earliest complete copy of the new testament, or are you going to claim that this isn't a manuscript of the bible?

robdonn

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Because it's a manuscript of the bible, the earliest complete copy of the new testament, or are you going to claim that this isn't a manuscript of the bible?

Does it have God's signature? No? Thought not....

Timberrrrrrrr

robdonn wrote: »

Does it have God's signature? No? Thought not....

Can you show me one that does?