Biblical matters

[Shan]

So when you consider these major differences, both strands of Christianity cant be right

However much more of relevance is that they can both be wrong. Ultimately it just comes down to what folk decide they want to believe. It is not really a matter of any importance in the overall scheme of things.

[CIMANFOREVER]

Sure its all Ballix anyway. Believe what you want. Just dont impose it on anyone else. Wherein lies the problem.....

[promenader 2]

http://www.thewicketgate.org/2015/05/ch ... ella-term/

This is a helpful article for those still confused

Odd. I'm not religious, but I occasionally meet people through work who do have faith. Some of these people I would say are a good advert for religion in general and Christianity in particular. Quakers and mennonites are the people of faith who most often fall into that category, for me anyway. Most often I have found them to be sincere, peace loving people. Yet your link casts doubt on their Christian credentials. Not many people in your club, is there?

I agree with you. I dont know much about Quakers but certainly Mennonites (also born out of a split from the catholic church) are typically good. As with anything I’m sure there are sections who I would say arent Christians but if they believe in the protestamt fundamental(s) - Christ is the son of God who died for the sins of man, and all need forgiveness through Christ alone - (ie. a gospel doctrine) then I would have little issue with calling them Christians

You're wrong about confirmation. I knew that because a Church of England friend once told me that he had been confirmed, but read for yourself here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions ... on_1.shtml
Your story about the man from America is bigoted bullshit, but it serves its purpose I'm sure: it's purpose being, of course, to reinforce the notion in gullible minds that 'themmuns' are a bunch of superstitious, feeble-minded idol worshippers.
And you still haven't explained to me why you mentioned Henry VIII as some sort of principled theologian, when he was simply a monarch desperate for a legitimate male heir and willing to break with Rome in order to divorce his wife.

[big mervyn]

Sure its all Ballix anyway. Believe what you want. Just dont impose it on anyone else. Wherein lies the problem.....

Indeed. I should thank our resident fundie for posting that link, which should clarify what a pile of absolute ballix it is for those of you who are still confused. Can they at least stop telling everybody else what to do with their willies?

[Dave]

http://www.thewicketgate.org/2015/05/ch ... ella-term/

This is a helpful article for those still confused

What is this, a blog of some kind?

So Catholics are not Christians then?

Do Roman Catholic's go to heaven or just the protestants?

Again, it depends how you define it

I dont see how this is hard to comprehend, but i’ll try again

There are quite significant differences

Roman Catholics:
- read the Apocrypha (the bible including the books removed during the reformation)
- baptism brings salvation (saving of sins)
- take the Eucharist (their version of communion where the bread/wafer and wine become part of Christ’s crucified body)
- confirmation (there is no protestant equivelent to my knowledge)
- reconciliation/confession (the people confess their sins to the priest who acts as a representive to Christ)
- they believe Mary to be mother of God and therefore worship her as such
- believe in purgatory at death (where you go before heaven/hell to be purged of final sins - priests often are paid to give prayers to the dead)


Now in the protestant (not pope kicking but theologicaly reformed) church, their response would be - forgetting the demoninational differences:
- read the 66 books of the bible, Luther removed the additional 7
- baptism is a symbol of salvation, not a method to salvation
- communion is taken and unlike the Eucharist there is no “real” part of Christ’s crucified body involved, just simple bread and wine to remember and give thanks to God for dying for our sins
- confirmation is not a thing
- unlike confession, Christ is the only one who can forgive sins and does not require a human mediator like a priest
- Mary was Jesus’ human mother, but there is no worship of Mary in the protestant demoninations
- when you die you either go to heaven or hell, there is no “final mediation” like purgatory involved. Salvation is from Christ alone (solus Christus) through faith alone (sola fide) by grace alone(sola gratia)

So when you consider these major differences, both strands of Christianity cant be right
The bible says there is only one way to heaven - by accepting Jesus as your saviour - but these two branches of christianity both contraidct each other in their teachings on how to get there

Funny story that I heard from a friend.. may or may not be true but highlights the problems the RC church face...

Many moons ago, a Roman Catholic man leaves Ireland to go to find work in the states.. this was before the days of email, etc, when faxes are still used. He gets there and sends a fax, however the fax gets lost. When his family havent heard from him they assume the worst so they start to pay the priest to give prayers for this “dead man”. Eventually the priest declares, “one more prayer and this man will leave purgatory and get to heaven”, so the family agree. However, at some point during all this, the man decides to come home - maybe America isnt all that it is cracked up to be. Fast forward however long this took place, as the man is declared dead and his soul has “definitely” left purgatory, and the man comes back to the shock of his family. Now if this story is true the conclusion is that the man started to question the work of the priest and eventually converted to Protestant christianity

As you can see now hopefully there are quite important differences. And as I say again my intention is not to be divisive- but somewhat informative !

Brill, it's not like god (in theory) would ask those after death to write a theological essay and if they don't match to your exact doctrine they will be turned away. As far as I am aware John 3:16 states 'whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life'. Surely, even if a RC believes that they are saved through works rather than an unconditional forgiveness, the 'grace' of god will cover their alternative understanding of the mechanism of salvation?

It seems that to some Christianity is an increasingly exclusive club. It serves no purpose to me so ultimately I'm unconcerned. Perhaps I'll burn for eternity after death for my unbelief. Maybe you will send down a good word on my behalf.

[big mervyn]

Perhaps I'll burn for eternity after death for my unbelief.

Ultimately, we'll all end up back in a star Dave, so yes, you'll burn for a long time, but not for eternity. I find that more comforting than religion.

[Dave]

Perhaps I'll burn for eternity after death for my unbelief.

Ultimately, we'll all end up back in a star Dave, so yes, you'll burn for a long time, but not for eternity. I find that more comforting than religion.

Could be a long enough time though. Nuclear fission can go on a bit

You wonder how some Christian's find comfort in believing the vast majority of humankind will burn eternally. Not all believers however.

[big mervyn]

[big mervyn]

... and I tell you something else. In fillums when some wee girl is possessed by the divil or Christopher Lee's about to get his teeth into some poor soul they NEVER send for a Free Presbyterian minister. It's always some wee priest with a battle of holy water, a big feck off fenian crucifix and more Latin than a public school motto. I rest my case.

[UlsterAreBrill]

So when you consider these major differences, both strands of Christianity cant be right

However much more of relevance is that they can both be wrong. Ultimately it just comes down to what folk decide they want to believe. It is not really a matter of any importance in the overall scheme of things.

I know that. But I see no reason why I (or anyone for that matter) should put up with constant anti-Christian memes or inaccuracies for the sake of "letting folks decide what they believe". It's just damned if I do, damned if I don't it seems

[UlsterAreBrill]

http://www.thewicketgate.org/2015/05/ch ... ella-term/

This is a helpful article for those still confused

Odd. I'm not religious, but I occasionally meet people through work who do have faith. Some of these people I would say are a good advert for religion in general and Christianity in particular. Quakers and mennonites are the people of faith who most often fall into that category, for me anyway. Most often I have found them to be sincere, peace loving people. Yet your link casts doubt on their Christian credentials. Not many people in your club, is there?

I agree with you. I dont know much about Quakers but certainly Mennonites (also born out of a split from the catholic church) are typically good. As with anything I’m sure there are sections who I would say arent Christians but if they believe in the protestamt fundamental(s) - Christ is the son of God who died for the sins of man, and all need forgiveness through Christ alone - (ie. a gospel doctrine) then I would have little issue with calling them Christians

You're wrong about confirmation. I knew that because a Church of England friend once told me that he had been confirmed, but read for yourself here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions ... on_1.shtml
Your story about the man from America is bigoted bullshit, but it serves its purpose I'm sure: it's purpose being, of course, to reinforce the notion in gullible minds that 'themmuns' are a bunch of superstitious, feeble-minded idol worshippers.
And you still haven't explained to me why you mentioned Henry VIII as some sort of principled theologian, when he was simply a monarch desperate for a legitimate male heir and willing to break with Rome in order to divorce his wife.

You have got some of this quite wrong but I'll try to help you once more

You're wrong about confirmation. I knew that because a Church of England friend once told me that he had been confirmed, but read for yourself here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions ... on_1.shtml
I missed the CoI who indeed practise confirmation however the majority of Protestant Christian denominations don't and personally I don't see the need for it. But fair enough I got that wrong

Your story about the man from America is bigoted bullshit, but it serves its purpose I'm sure: it's purpose being, of course, to reinforce the notion in gullible minds that 'themmuns' are a bunch of superstitious, feeble-minded idol worshippers.
No the point is valid. It proves there is logical inconsistencies with Roman Catholic doctrine. As for your claim of "themmuns"... what a waste of time and a completely unnecessary comment. Firstly as I have stated many times, 1) i'm not trying to be divine, 2) I am stating theological facts, not, as I have said "kick the pope" type arguments and 3) I have never been to and refuse to attend 11th/12th/13th 'celebrations' because it is a waste of time. So a pretty classless comment, one that takes the argument completely out of context- if anything the celebration should be celebrating a theological split from the RC inconsistencies

And you still haven't explained to me why you mentioned Henry VIII as some sort of principled theologian, when he was simply a monarch desperate for a legitimate male heir and willing to break with Rome in order to divorce his wife.
Complete lack of understanding if you think I was claiming Henry VIII was a "principled theologian". He split from the catholic church for whatever reason, which by default started the reformation in Europe. That is undisputed regardless of what you put it to. Having studied history at both under and post grad level I would say I know what i'm talking about, but if you need to know it was Edward VI that drove, for a short few years, major religious reform in England. Whether what he done in that regard was just is a different matter, but that's a different conversation yet again

[UlsterAreBrill]

http://www.thewicketgate.org/2015/05/ch ... ella-term/

This is a helpful article for those still confused

What is this, a blog of some kind?

So Catholics are not Christians then?

Do Roman Catholic's go to heaven or just the protestants?

Again, it depends how you define it

I dont see how this is hard to comprehend, but i’ll try again

There are quite significant differences

Roman Catholics:
- read the Apocrypha (the bible including the books removed during the reformation)
- baptism brings salvation (saving of sins)
- take the Eucharist (their version of communion where the bread/wafer and wine become part of Christ’s crucified body)
- confirmation (there is no protestant equivelent to my knowledge)
- reconciliation/confession (the people confess their sins to the priest who acts as a representive to Christ)
- they believe Mary to be mother of God and therefore worship her as such
- believe in purgatory at death (where you go before heaven/hell to be purged of final sins - priests often are paid to give prayers to the dead)


Now in the protestant (not pope kicking but theologicaly reformed) church, their response would be - forgetting the demoninational differences:
- read the 66 books of the bible, Luther removed the additional 7
- baptism is a symbol of salvation, not a method to salvation
- communion is taken and unlike the Eucharist there is no “real” part of Christ’s crucified body involved, just simple bread and wine to remember and give thanks to God for dying for our sins
- confirmation is not a thing
- unlike confession, Christ is the only one who can forgive sins and does not require a human mediator like a priest
- Mary was Jesus’ human mother, but there is no worship of Mary in the protestant demoninations
- when you die you either go to heaven or hell, there is no “final mediation” like purgatory involved. Salvation is from Christ alone (solus Christus) through faith alone (sola fide) by grace alone(sola gratia)

So when you consider these major differences, both strands of Christianity cant be right
The bible says there is only one way to heaven - by accepting Jesus as your saviour - but these two branches of christianity both contraidct each other in their teachings on how to get there

Funny story that I heard from a friend.. may or may not be true but highlights the problems the RC church face...

Many moons ago, a Roman Catholic man leaves Ireland to go to find work in the states.. this was before the days of email, etc, when faxes are still used. He gets there and sends a fax, however the fax gets lost. When his family havent heard from him they assume the worst so they start to pay the priest to give prayers for this “dead man”. Eventually the priest declares, “one more prayer and this man will leave purgatory and get to heaven”, so the family agree. However, at some point during all this, the man decides to come home - maybe America isnt all that it is cracked up to be. Fast forward however long this took place, as the man is declared dead and his soul has “definitely” left purgatory, and the man comes back to the shock of his family. Now if this story is true the conclusion is that the man started to question the work of the priest and eventually converted to Protestant christianity

As you can see now hopefully there are quite important differences. And as I say again my intention is not to be divisive- but somewhat informative !

Brill, it's not like god (in theory) would ask those after death to write a theological essay and if they don't match to your exact doctrine they will be turned away. As far as I am aware John 3:16 states 'whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life'. Surely, even if a RC believes that they are saved through works rather than an unconditional forgiveness, the 'grace' of god will cover their alternative understanding of the mechanism of salvation?

It seems that to some Christianity is an increasingly exclusive club. It serves no purpose to me so ultimately I'm unconcerned. Perhaps I'll burn for eternity after death for my unbelief. Maybe you will send down a good word on my behalf.

It's not a case of asking for a theological essay or matching "my" doctrine (whatever that means). the bible clearly states that to get to heaven - which you go to when you die - not purgatory - is that you accept you are a sinner, trust Christ's finished work on the cross and his resurrection as the only way to have your sins forgiven then that is enough

As pointed out this is quite different from RC doctrine

But I appreciate your comment on faith vs works. At least you are actually thinking. Paul actually addressed the argument of salvation from works vs salvation from faith in a lot of his letters. It is not a new issue and one that was prominent in both Jewish leaders and in the early Gentile church. Read Galatians 2 for reference

dave, you should spend some time watching Dr Don Carson. He is a very intelligent man, Christian thinker and could argue philosopher. He actually studied chemistry so has a background in Science. He would certainly be of interest to you, and intellectually much more challenging than I could ever hope to be

[Dave]

It's not a case of asking for a theological essay or matching "my" doctrine (whatever that means). the bible clearly states that to get to heaven - which you go to when you die - not purgatory - is that you accept you are a sinner, trust Christ's finished work on the cross and his resurrection as the only way to have your sins forgiven then that is enough

As pointed out this is quite different from RC doctrine

On that basis, in your view do you think a roman catholic would be accepted into heaven?

I feel it would be very harsh to exclude on the basis of believing they need to do further works. They have tried their best and it is likely all they know but then are informed that they must burn eternally. Is this fair?

It got me thinking about how many people will be in hell. Any estimate I can come up with is well into the 10s of billions. It must be a big place.

[big mervyn]

It's not a case of asking for a theological essay or matching "my" doctrine (whatever that means). the bible clearly states that to get to heaven - which you go to when you die - not purgatory - is that you accept you are a sinner, trust Christ's finished work on the cross and his resurrection as the only way to have your sins forgiven then that is enough

As pointed out this is quite different from RC doctrine

On that basis, in your view do you think a roman catholic would be accepted into heaven?

I feel it would be very harsh to exclude on the basis of believing they need to do further works. They have tried their best and it is likely all they know but then are informed that they must burn eternally. Is this fair?

It got me thinking about how many people will be in hell. Any estimate I can come up with is well into the 10s of billions. It must be a big place.

Supposed to be in the order of 100 billion. You have to take off the hindus of course as they reincarnate All f*cking bonkers isn't it?

Where do you stand on the accident of birth Brillo? Childer born into God fearing Pradestant homes would seem to have a considerable advantage over fenians, and other "not praper Christians" never mind the other heathen hoards. Virtually nobody ever switches sides so it doesn't seem at all fair does it?

[Jackie Brown]

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk