And for some Humor...

Originally posted by Delance
About Preacher, why can’t he preach (regardless of what he was doing it or not)? Is it against forum rules? I think people have the right to speak their mind.
Because it always leads to arguments. See this thread, for example. Preacher's (admittedly, atypically subtle) preaching led to T8H3X11 showing up and... well, you can read.

In short, when people preach, wailing and gnashing of teeth inevitably follows. And we don't want that here.
 
And, when you get onto a topic like which religion you have to follow or not (for my two cents, it's altogether possible that one's actions, not his or her beliefs, is what matters), you will inevitably have very heated arguements in both the religion itself and the interpretation of a religion, such as Musilum and it's Koran.
 
Originally posted by Delance

Are those recent jews who converted? Because a lot of the original jews that composed the Christian population were just integrated into the growing catholic church.
...Anyway, the point I was trying to make is that "non-Christians are going to hell" is but one interpretation of the Bible. Not even a majoritary one amongst Christians.
...This is a non-catholic interpretation of the Bible, the Church doesn’t accept it. It is one of the major sources of debate between Catholic and Protestant theologians those days. Actually, there is a desire between some protestant churches and the Catholic Church to re-approximate, and this is one of the major divergences.
...Catholics says that if the person is good, he or she is going to heaven. Some protestants says this is a lie that comes straights from the devil. Supposedly, all christians, including evil ones, goes to heaven, and everyone else goes to hell regardless of their lives. There's no judgment at all in judment day, it's a matter of formality.
(1) When I said Messianic Jews, I was speaking of Jews in recent years (that is, the *terminology* is of recent vintage) who converted to Christianity. And, just to be specific, they weren't integrated into the "Catholic" church (that is, the Roman Catholics), but rather the "catholic" (that is, the "universal") church. I say that as clarification because the Roman church per se didn't exist until hundreds of years after the original apostles & initial believers had died.
(My apologies if you spelled it with a "c" deliberately, to reflect this fact.)

(2) You are in error. It is THE *majority* view of Christendom; that those who die without Christ will spend eternity separated from God (aka "hell", "the bad place", "headin' south", etc.). The Bible couldn't possibly make this any clearer. Don't take my word for it; See John 3:36, Acts 4:12, Romans 10:9-10, 1st John 1:7 thru 2:6 (to name a few) if you need more clarification on this.

(3) The fact that some sects/denominations have missed the boat on this doesn't change it one whit. If your representation of the RCC's (Roman Catholic Church) position is accurate, then I can pretty much assure you that the "re-approximation" you spoke of will never occur. The guiding principle here is (I forget where this quote comes from, but it's right on the mark): "In essentials, unity; In non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity". In other words, we can agree to disagree on various points if they're not essential to the faith, but if they ARE, then unity cannot happen.

(4) I ask you again: When did the RCC change their position on this issue, since, as I'd said, when I was a boy growing up, the RCC's position was most definitely hardline ("if you're not Catholic, you're toast")?... Also, on what basis (if any) was the position changed?...
I have another question for you personally: You speak of the RCC position in various of your posts, but have you actually read for yourself what the Scripture has to say on these issues?... I suspect if you had, you would be a bit less certain of your positions. It is wise to be like the Bereans, who "...examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true." (Acts 17:11), rather than simply accepting what the RCC (or Lutherans, Baptists, or any other denomination you want to name) says.

Further clarification is needed on something else you said, so I'll provide it. Because of Adam, ALL men inherit a sin nature, and in that sense, we are ALL "evil" (see Jeremiah 17:9). However, the gospels' position on that matter is that, if you place your faith in Christ, you have forgiveness of your sins, and thus entrance into heaven when you die. So in that sense, you're right that "all christians...goes to heaven, and everyone else goes to hell regardless of their lives". But it's important to note that an "evil" Christian is something of an oxymoron, in that if a person truly has accepted Christ, while they will continue to sin, they will NOT continue to live a lifestyle of sin. If they DO, then you can pretty much guess that they're not truly a Christian ("by their fruits ye shall know them"...). Also, it needs be said that being a Christian is not about what denomination you follow (Catholic, Baptist, Methodist, etc.), but rather, what your belief in Christ is. To put it another way, Christianity is not a religion, it's a relationship (w/ Christ, that is). That said, it's open to people of any & all religious backgrounds, so long as they make that crucial decision while they still have the chance (that is, while they still draw breath in this world).
Originally posted by Quarto

...In short, when people preach, wailing and gnashing of teeth inevitably follows...
LOL! Good use of scripture, dude.
Originally posted by Phillip Tanaka

...it's altogether possible that one's actions, not his or her beliefs, is what matters), ...
This is true, but there's one important fact you omitted: One's actions tend to be predicated on one's beliefs. This is especialy true when the topic is religion. The apostles could never have "turned the world upside down with their preaching" if they weren't preaching the gospel that Christ gave them; that was their belief, and so they acted on it, and with great power.
 
Originally posted by Preacher
(2) You are in error. It is THE *majority* view of Christendom; that those who die without Christ will spend eternity separated from God (aka "hell", "the bad place", "headin' south", etc.). The Bible couldn't possibly make this any clearer. Don't take my word for it; See John 3:36, Acts 4:12, Romans 10:9-10, 1st John 1:7 thru 2:6 (to name a few) if you need more clarification on this.

When I say "Christians", I'm talking about the actual meaning of this world, the one on the dictionaries and universally accepted. It includes Roman Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants, Evangelical, Pentecostal, Sects and etc.

The Orthodox Catholics doesn't feel this way as far as I know. The Roman Catholics, neither. That's probably over a billion people. Now, if the majority of Protestants or Christian sects on the US/Canada feel that way, I have no idea. At least here, I know a lot of protestants that think differetnly.

I have another question for you personally: You speak of the RCC position in various of your posts, but have you actually read for yourself what the Scripture has to say on these issues?...

Have you read the entire Bible? Not the translation, but the original one, on the original language? The text is even different from religion to religion, from country to country. Have you? Have you spent decades to study the original text, and published several academic papers praised in several universities were hundreds of people study the Bible? No? Well, people who have disagree with you. Now isn’t that curious? Are all those people idiots?

You completely missed my original point. You, preacher, is not an exegete sanctioned by the Sacred Roman Catholic Church. Your personal interpretation, or the one of your group (which I don’t know the name) is, at a minimum, irrelevant to Catholics. Don't go preaching on us, pretending you know more than our Mother Church and everyone here is a moron, because you won’t get good results. The Roman Catholic Church has existed since the days of the old Roman Empire, and several men have dedicated their entire lives to interpret the Holy Scriptures. The Catholic Church has a lot of accumulated wisdom. They know what they are talking about.

Now some guys say that the Catholics are a bunch of stupid demon-worshipers, and that to say that good people go to heaven is a satanic lie. Well, I choose to think that's nonsense, thanks to my God-Given Right of Free Will. I know that some protestants (at least originally) said that Free Will was an evil Catholic thing, but we happen to like it.

Preacher, think about it, seriously. To say good people go to heaven is a lie? A murderous rapist that converts to your religion 1 second before he dies will go to heaven immediately, without any punishment or judgment, while millions of good human souls that were kind and generous will spend eternity in hell because they were born in 1000 B.C.?

So there's no judgment? If there’s only one requisite, no questions asked? Personal deeds are not even considered. If someone was cruel, heartless evil man, or had a good, generous and pious life would be utter and completely irrelevant. If they respected every single of the Holy Commandments or broke every one of them would be of no importance. There would be no judgment, just one question.

Now, to put it simply. Get things in perspective. You do not own the truth. You do not have the monopoly of the interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. A very, very large number of theologians and exegetes, of several different religions, denominations and universities, from the most varied countries, throughout the centuries, even some Catholic Saints, think differently then you.

I respect your opinions, and you should respect the opinions and beliefs of others. We are human and imperfect. We disagree on things. We, individually or in groups, don't own the monopoly of truth.
 
Originally posted by Delance

When I say "Christians", I'm talking about the actual meaning of this world...

...Have you read the entire Bible? Not the translation, but the original one, on the original language? The text is even different from religion to religion, from country to country. Have you?... Well, people who have disagree with you. Now isn’t that curious? Are all those people idiots?

...You, preacher, is not an exegete sanctioned by the Sacred Roman Catholic Church. Your personal interpretation, or the one of your group (which I don’t know the name) is, at a minimum, irrelevant to Catholics. Don't go preaching on us, pretending you know more than our Mother Church and everyone here is a moron... The Roman Catholic Church has existed since...(etc.,etc.,etc.)...They know what they are talking about.
It sounds like we are talking about the same definitions. Apparently I need to clarify: What I'm saying is not numerically, but *categorically* true. I'm aware that RCC's alone are in excess of a billion population worldwide. What I'm talking about is this: If you take the *number* of different mainstream Christian denominations that there are (Orthodox/RCC/Protestant/Evangelical/etc.) and categorically put down what they think on this point, you would have the vast majority of the "categories" (=denominations) saying the same thing on that point: that salvation is thru Christ alone.

Speaking of clarifying, how 'bout you answer my questions?... You still haven't told us whether you've actually read the Bible (original or modern English/whatever your native language; doesn't matter) yourself... Nor have you answered when it was that the RCC changed their position on "who" is eligible for heaven... As to different languages/translations, you are way overgeneralizing. Of course there are different translations (let's just stick w/ the English language ones); after all, how many people can slog through King James English, for example?... The key thing to remember is that the sum of the translations are in agreement as to the basic truths they cite. Moreover, at least in the "Protestant" translations, there's no "different ones from one religion to the next", as you imply. AFAIK, there's no translation that's specific to a (Protestant) denomination. (Don't even bother mentioning Mormons or Jehovah's witnesses; that's a whole 'nother can of worms...).

Of course the text is different from country to country, in that Spanish language construction (for example) is far different than English vocabulary/syntax, etc. The message is still the same. I have not read the Original language texts, because I don't speak Greek, Hebrew or Aramaic. However, I HAVE read the English text in numerous different translations, and about a dozen times through overall - I have about 6 different translations/versions here in the house at any given time (including a RCC translation or 2, BTW). I can tell you that in 14 years of this, I've never once come across a single passage that differed in its essence from one translation to the next. That says something. If people wanna disagree with me, that's fine. They're not "idiots", as you imply (It seems you are getting far more personally involved in this discussion than is wise, since you're reading things into my statements that simply aren't there).

As to my "group", I don't belong to one, theologically speaking; I have no specific denominational ties. I was raised Catholic, am now an Evangelical, and currently attend a non-denominational church. My first loyalty is to the true word of God, and that doesn't belong exclusively to any one denomination (incl. the RCC) or translation of the Bible. Again, I never said nor implied that the RCC or it's leaders are "morons", as you put it. But last time I checked, they ARE human. And with being human comes the fallibility thereof. That is why it is so crucially important for each believer to search the Scriptures themselves, as did the Bereans. You get enough theologically lazy people who let the church do their thinking for them, and you end up with the Branch Davidians, or the People's Temple - cults whose only goal is their own glorification, not God's, and whose end is horrific. What you say of the RCC's "credentials" is nice, but just cuz they been around longer'n anyone else doesn't make them "right". The standard any church is to be compared to is simply this: How do their teachings square with what the gospel says?... If/when there's error, said church needs to come clean and mend its ways. The RCC might "know what they're talking about", but they ain't perfect. When they are, I'll follow their doctrine. Until then, I'll go w/ what Scriptures say over what any denomination tries to teach me.

...Now some guys say that the Catholics are a bunch of stupid demon-worshipers, and that to say that good people go to heaven is a satanic lie...

Preacher, think about it, seriously. To say good people go to heaven is a lie? A murderous rapist that converts to your religion 1 second before he dies will go to heaven immediately, without any punishment or judgment, while millions of good human souls that were kind and generous will spend eternity in hell because they were born in 1000 B.C.?

So there's no judgment? If there’s only one requisite, no questions asked? Personal deeds are not even considered. If someone was cruel, heartless evil man, or had a good, generous and pious life would be utter and completely irrelevant. If they respected every single of the Holy Commandments or broke every one of them would be of no importance. There would be no judgment, just one question.
I know it's a hard teaching, but yes, the main thrust of what you said is the heart of the gospel message: All who believe will be saved (Romans 10:9-13) . Scripture makes quite clear that NONE of us is "good enough" to inherit the kingdom (see my earlier reference to Jeremiah; also various other places too numerous to mention in the NT). That's why we need a Savior, thus why Christ had to come in human flesh. As to your illustration, I point you to Luke 23:43: The thief alongside Christ had lived a life deserving of punishment, death, and hell. He was minutes/seconds away from same when he came to believe in the Messiah, and Christ assured him that he would be in heaven with Him. It's hard to imagine a more extreme real-life example. In fact, JC Himself gives a parable (Matthew 20:1-16, the "Parable of the workers in the vineyard") wherein the "rewards" of heaven (figuratively speaking) seem to be handed out in what strikes us as an unfair fashion. That right there should tell you that the standard is God's, not man's, and His standard is quite a bit different from ours. That's why you (and so many others) have trouble grasping this truth.

As to people born before the time of Christ, there was salvation available for them, but to go into that would be prohibitively lengthy, so I'm not exploring that as an issue. All I will do is just to mention the fact that, David & Moses, for example were murderers, liars, etc., and yet I know of no one who honestly thinks that they are in hell right now for their sins. Why?...because they believed in God and followed Him as best they could according to the fullness of God that He'd revealed to man up to that point.

And as for "good people" not being able to make it into heaven, I say again that before God there is none "good" enough. The problem is that you're using a *human* standard of goodness, which is far inferior to God's standard. See Isaiah 53:6 for an illustration. Again, that's why a Savior was/is necessary.

...Now, to put it simply. Get things in perspective. You do not own the truth. You do not have the monopoly of the interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. A very, very large number of theologians and exegetes, of several different religions, denominations and universities, from the most varied countries, throughout the centuries, even some Catholic Saints, think differently then you.

...I respect your opinions, and you should respect the opinions and beliefs of others. We are human and imperfect. We disagree on things. We, individually or in groups, don't own the monopoly of truth.
Finally, your conclusions are suspect, to say the least. It does not appear as you "respect" my opinion at all, in that you're vilifying and putting words/thoughts into my statements that just aren't there. You'll note that I'm not doing that with you, or anyone else. For someone who seems to be preaching tolerance, you're remarkably devoid of it yourself... Secondly, I never claimed to "own" the truth, whereas it seems you're making a pretty good bid to do so yourself. I can defend (and have) any & every point I've made from Scripture. It would be nice if you would at least *try* to do so, instead of citing merely human institutions. I speak in defense of the truth, which is why I bother responding to your posts at all, and I will gladly converse with anyone on these things, even if their views are different than mine.
 
Don't play with semantics. So the Roman Catholic Church is a minority because a single religion has a billion people?

Well, you pretty much ignored my post, and repeated your previous one. I shall not do that, or will go in circles. Not once you even used the word exegete.

The Exegesis of the Bible is a science. There is a vast academic world about it. People study for years before they can even publish material on it. As far as I'm concerned, your views are very minoritary in the academic world, to put it nicely. And I'm not only talking about the Roman Catholics.

I'm not theologian, so I can't argue this in such academic level. You are not a lawyer, so we can't debate law on the same level about law, either. That doesn't mean I'll always be right about it automatically. In my humble knowledge, I believe you are wrong. I’m not trying to prove to you that you are wrong, so I don’t need to start bringing evidence of it here. I don’t think is even possible to reason this with you, at all. You seem to believe on this with adamantium will, as you put it yourself. This means your belief cannot be affected by reason, logic, proofs, and all that stuff. That’s not really the matter, but what one actually believes in. It’s a matter of faith.

This is not "letting other people think for you" rhetoric doesn't hold water. It's the same argument people who think vaccines are a conspiracy of aliens from planet X. "So, have you ever conducted a study on vaccines for yourself? So you let people think for you! Who needs medical school?" The reason that a academic world exist is so you can accumulate knowledge and learn from the works of others. Don't automatically disregard it as unimportant just because they don't agree with your views.
 
Originally posted by Delance

Don't play with semantics. So the Roman Catholic Church is a minority because a single religion has a billion people?
No word play involved, mi amigo; the RCC is a "minority" (to use your term) because they are but one of many mainstream Christian denominations, therefore, only one of many Christian "belief systems" out there. If I failed to make that point clearly enough to you, I apologize. Hopefully it's clear now.

The Exegesis of the Bible is a science. There is a vast academic world about it. People study for years before they can even publish material on it. As far as I'm concerned, your views are very minoritary in the academic world...
I'm well acquainted with the term "exegesis", but you don't seem too well-acquainted with the idea that it is not only the scholars within the sterile walls of academia who can exegete Scripture, but also "everyday" pastors and teachers of the Word. Being an academic per se doesn't automatically grant you greater powers of discernment & insight than the average mortal. The fact is, academia can even be a hindrance to same. Give me a well-educated and bright pastor in a pulpit who loves the Word, and has to slog thru the same fallen world as the rest of us than a dry academic any day, when it comes to how the Word is to be interpreted & applied to real life. I don't doubt that my views are 'at odds with the academic world' as a whole. But my concern is not (nor ever has been) what the academic world thinks of the Word. (After all, it's the "academic world" that gave us the 'Jesus seminar', wherein supposedly knowledgeable men proceed to tear down the Word in such minute detail that they'd have us believe that Christ didn't say but a small fraction of the things we all know He DID say... Sheesh!...). No, my passion is for how the pastors in the pulpits understand the Bible, and how they teach and model for us parishioners in the pews how the Word is to be applied in real life. And if any pastor says something that conflicts with what I know to be true of the Bible, I will question him, research it for myself, pray over the matter , and come to some conclusion as to whether I think he has a valid point or not.

I'm not theologian, so I can't argue this in such academic level. You are not a lawyer, so we can't debate law on the same level about law, either. That doesn't mean I'll always be right about it automatically. In my humble knowledge, I believe you are wrong. I’m not trying to prove to you that you are wrong, so I don’t need to start bringing evidence of it here. I don’t think is even possible to reason this with you, at all. You seem to believe on this with adamantium will, as you put it yourself. This means your belief cannot be affected by reason, logic, proofs, and all that stuff. That’s not really the matter, but what one actually believes in. It’s a matter of faith.
You are right in saying it's a matter of faith. However, faith is not about blind trust. You must know what you believe in and why you believe that way (that is, what Scriptural backing there is for this position or that) for your faith to be solid. That's why Luke commended the Bereans in the book of Acts (see my prior reference); for investigating the Scriptures for themselves. It's only when you get to the point where you've studied all you can (& prayed about it, etc.) on the topic and STILL don't understand that you trust God for the rest that you don't understand. There is no shame in this, but still, you have to make an honest effort at finding your answers yourself first. That's why God gave man such a towering intellect as He did, and gave us the Scriptures in the first place. He knew we'd never be able to understand, on our own, ALL of what He gave us, but He wants us to use the gifts He gave us to honestly try to do so, and then He's there to answer whatsoever remaining questions we will no doubt have (only, in His own way, with His own timing).
This is not "letting other people think for you" rhetoric doesn't hold water. It's the same argument people who think vaccines are a conspiracy of aliens from planet X. "So, have you ever conducted a study on vaccines for yourself? So you let people think for you! Who needs medical school?" The reason that a academic world exist is so you can accumulate knowledge and learn from the works of others. Don't automatically disregard it as unimportant just because they don't agree with your views.
Ironically, your argument *against* my statement about "letting other people do your thinking for you" does not, itself, hold water: Medical school is beyond the intellectual capacity (to say nothing of the tuition costs, etc.) of the average person. If this were not so, we'd have a lot more doctors running around out there. That is the very beauty of the Bible; it is written for all men whatsoever who want to learn about God and what He expects of us. It is within the grasp of the smallest literate child who can read, and at the same time millenia of earnest theologians and academics have come and gone and we are STILL only scratching the surface of unraveling its mysteries. I'm all for learning from the works of others, inasmuch as I have spent the time, money, and hard work of 7 years' schooling in becoming the Physician Assistant that I am. But lemme tell you something: All the double-blind, randomized metatrials about this drug or that therapy don't amount to a hill of beans until it has been demonstrated how those theoretical findings will work on REAL patients with REAL diseases. Likewise, academia also only goes so far when it comes to matters of theology and faith. It seems you would make it 'uber alles', when in fact it should only be a starting point. I don't dismiss academia's views as unimportant cuz they don't agree with mine. I only dismiss (anyone's) views when they don't square with the Gospel text itself, and/or my own experience & teachings I've received from equally gifted theologians I've sat at the feet of (some of whom, yes, were academics themselves, btw).
This danger of letting others think for you is one of the big reasons that Martin Luther had for starting what would come to be called the Reformation; he was insistent that the people in the pews should have equal access to the same Book their priests were lording over them. Once they had that access, it became clear to all that, for example, selling indulgences to get one into heaven was most definitely NOT a scriptually sound or defensible practice. And hey, whattaya know; once this factoid came to light, the Church eventually stopped the practice...

Well, you pretty much ignored my post...
OK, um, exactly what post of yours (or portions thereof) did I ignore?... I'll gladly reply if you tell me what/where...
 
Allright, Preacher, as your requested, here's some catholic doctrine. I'm quoting a few paragraphs of the Catechism of Catholic Church. You can read it all here. There is a nice thread about this on a catholic forum here.

The Church's bond with non-Christian religions is in the first place the common origin and end of the human race:
All nations form but one community. This is so because all stem from the one stock which God created to people the entire earth, and also because all share a common destiny, namely God. His providence, evident goodness, and saving designs extend to all against the day when the elect are gathered together in the holy city." - 842 CCC (Catechism of Catholic Church)

The Catholic Church recognizes in other religions that search, among shadows and images, for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as "a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life. - 843 CCC

God predestines no one to go to hell; for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end.) - 1037 CCC

"Teacher, what good deed must I do, to have eternal life?" To the young man who asked this question, Jesus answers first by invoking the necessity to recognize God as the "One there is who is good," as the supreme Good and the source of all good. Then Jesus tells him: "If you would enter life, keep the commandments." And he cites for his questioner the precepts that concern love of neighbor: "You shall not kill, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness, Honor your father and mother." Finally Jesus sums up these commandments positively: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." - 2052 CCC

In the words of Saint Augustine:

"God created us without us: but He did not will to save us without us"

Anyway, is this about OSAS, or is it something else? I'm sorry, I don't know that much about non-catholic christians teachings.

Hopefully, this was helpful.
 
Originally posted by Preacher
This is true, but there's one important fact you omitted: One's actions tend to be predicated on one's beliefs. This is especialy true when the topic is religion. The apostles could never have "turned the world upside down with their preaching" if they weren't preaching the gospel that Christ gave them; that was their belief, and so they acted on it, and with great power.

I'm not a bible basher, despite being Christian, but I thought that it made sense that we should be more worried about doing the right thing regardless of our religion than to cause hatred and war over which religion we have to follow.
 
Go to Hell. Go directly to Hell. Do not pass Go. Go not collect $200

Well, I'm still going to be patient and give when I can. It's my belief in being a good person. Either way guys, I'm sure I'll see the majority of you in Hell. Keep a seat warm for me if you get there first! :D

As for Hell, well, my friend who has recently become as... knowledgable about faith as Preacher is, has said that myself (Athiest) and my other friends (who happen to be Roman Catholics/Anglicans) are going to hell because they believe in Mary and the Saints doing the work of God (and because I refuse to believe at all, obviously).

So in his eyes, even they believe in Jesus, because they pray to Mary and the various saints, they will go to hell. Due to his 'beliefs', they really don't like to talk about religion in front of him, but I like the occasional banter. :)

Also Preacher, does it not strike you as odd that Christian festivals and traditions have their roots in other, Pagan or 'evil' religions. After all, Christmas is celebrated at the time of the Pagan summer solstice or Roman Saturnalia. Easter also was a fertility festival I believe in ancient Germanic and Celtic cultures. Also the 'day of judgment' seems to be something straight from Ancient Egyption religion. To me, religion merely evolves on other religions and takes ideas from those before it.

In my opinion, Philip is right. God should look to the substance of the good being done, not the form. That is, the charitable acts of a person, the substance, and not their denomination, the form.

PS. This thread is really intriguing! Thanks.
 
Originally posted by Delance

Anyway, is this about OSAS, or is it something else? I'm sorry, I don't know that much about non-catholic christians teachings.

Hopefully, this was helpful.
Um, what exactly is OSAS?.... Ya lost me there...
Originally posted by Philip Tanaka

...I thought that it made sense that we should be more worried about doing the right thing regardless of our religion than to cause hatred and war over which religion we have to follow.
Sure, doing "the right thing" (generally speaking) is always the goal, and is a noble endeavor. And we are not to hate people or nations, we are only to hate their evil deeds. (The old saying "hate the sin, love the sinner" comes to mind here...). If you look in the Bible (mainly the Old Testament), none of Israels wars they fought were because of religion per se. God ordered them to slaughter this or that nation because their religious or cultural practices were an affront to God (sacrificing one's children in the fire, homosexuality, religious prostitution, etc.), and if they "peacefully coexisted" with said pagan nation, God knew that eventually those practices would creep into Israel, and they would be corrupted by them.
Originally posted by redwolf

...Either way guys, I'm sure I'll see the majority of you in Hell. Keep a seat warm for me if you get there first!...So in his eyes, even they believe in Jesus, because they pray to Mary and the various saints, they will go to hell. Due to his 'beliefs', they really don't like to talk about religion in front of him, but I like the occasional banter.
Sorry, you won't see me there, but it's not because I'm such a 'good person'. The fact is, I'm as depraved as anyone else out there (Unfortunately, I'm reminded of this fact almost daily...). The difference is, I am forgiven ("...because I know whom I have believed, and am convinced that he is able to guard what I have entrusted to him for that day." - 2 Timothy 1:12), and that's what makes all the difference, as I've been trying to point out to y'all. For what it's worth, though, I don't think keeping the seats warm will be a problem. :D
As for Hell, well, my friend who has recently become as... knowledgable about faith as Preacher is, has said that myself (Athiest) and my other friends (who happen to be Roman Catholics/Anglicans) are going to hell because they believe in Mary and the Saints doing the work of God (and because I refuse to believe at all, obviously).
I'd say your friend is a bit too dogmatic and judgemental. It is not for the believer to say who will and who won't be going to hell, it's God's decision, and only God knows the inner heart of the person. What we believers are tasked with doing, though, is to point out the truth that He has revealed to us, and leave it up to the person themselves to decide. In short, God is the Judge, we are simply witnesses. In this case, it's not so much that the RCC/Anglicans believe whatever stuff they believe about Mary/the saints; the crucial issue is, *what* do they believe about Christ Himself?... Whatsoever *wrong* doctrines they may believe, if they have the role of Christ as Lord & Savior correct in their hearts, then that is the primary issue. God will sort out the secondary issues with the person in time. As to non-belief, it is the one and only sin that God cannot/will not forgive (spoken of in some translations as "blaspheming the Holy Spirit"; I can't locate the reference at the moment). It is important to understand what is meant by that statement. God can & will forgive ANY sin so long as the person repents of it, which is why the thief on the cross was able to enter paradise. Repent means to regret the sin and to "turn over a new leaf", so to speak. It doesn't matter (as with that thief) whether or not the person has much time left on this planet to live out that repentant lifestyle; the key thing is, in their heart, they have put it behind them & resolved to turn away from it, and have accepted Christ as both Lord and Savior. That's why (as with the thief on the cross), there is ALWAYS hope for anyone to be able to enter heaven, so long as they are still drawing breath in this sphere (I can't emphasize this enough!). Little wonder, then, that the original word "gospel" means "good news"!...
Also Preacher, does it not strike you as odd that Christian festivals and traditions have their roots in other, Pagan or 'evil' religions. After all, Christmas is celebrated at the time of the Pagan summer solstice or Roman Saturnalia. Easter also was a fertility festival I believe in ancient Germanic and Celtic cultures. Also the 'day of judgment' seems to be something straight from Ancient Egyption religion...
Not in the least. Paul sought to "become all things to all men" (1 Corinthians 9:19-23) so as to win as many as possible to Christ. What this boils down to is to take from the culture/group you find yourself in, and find ways to use the things of that culture/group to point people to the true God. In this case, that meant taking the pagan festival days, and supplanting them, replacing them with appropriate Christian holidays. That's what has happened with Christmas/Easter/All Souls' day (the day AFTER Halloween).
In my opinion, Philip is right. God should look to the substance of the good being done, not the form. That is, the charitable acts of a person, the substance, and not their denomination, the form.
Not to split hairs with ya, but there is no such thing as "God 'should' ". He is sovereign. The only thing He "should" do is to be consistent with His own character as revealed in the Scriptures, and He does that 24/7/365. He is not constrained to act in accordance with our expectations of Him. Rather, it is we who are constrained to act in accordance with His will, if we would know Him and love Him and have fellowship with Him.
As to the "acts" of a person, I point you to 1 Corinthians 13:1-3... Herein, Paul makes very clear to us that a person can do all the good acts in the world, but if he has not love (that is, love for God = Jesus), he will "gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul".
As to the "form", God cares not one whit what denomination a person is, nor what sins they have committed. He only is concerned with whether or not we believe in His son (in our hearts, not just in our heads, mind you...), and if so, have we repented of our sins. That is the key thing.
This thread is really intriguing! Thanks.
You're welcome (for the part that I've played in this, anyway).
 
It's funny you brought up the topic of homosexuality, because at the moment where I live there is a lot of raised emotions about them, particularly same sex couples being allowed to adopt children. Do you know where in the bible it mentions homosexuality, whether or not it is a sin?
 
Great. Now we'll have the pros and cons of pole smokers and carpet munchers.:rolleyes:
 
Dykes. Lesbos. Get it yet?;)

I see you didn't have any trouble with the pole smoker thing.......Hmmmmmm.....:eek:
 
Lemme just check here. Hmmm...

"Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable."

"Do not have sexual relations with an animal and defile yourself with it. A woman must not present herself to an animal to have sexual relations with it; that is a perversion."

These were the words spoken to Moses by The Lord. As some of you know, sexual relations with animals is illegal in some countries. But then I remember when I fought child porn that a defence was made about sexual relations with children because it was in the bible. Child porn, or paedophilia, is definetly illegal, so under the assumption that such a statement is in the bible, it seems to be a little muddy in view of current and past law. On homosexuality, I remember a scandal involving a lesbian who became a minister. A fellow minister was asked about it, how homosexuality was forbidden by the church. (Either Christian or Catholic, from memory). Not quite, said the minister. Homosexual activity, much like abstinance nuns take up.
 
Originally posted by Preacher
Um, what exactly is OSAS?.... Ya lost me there...

"Once Saved, Always Saved".

The big differences between the Roman Catholic Church and other Christian denominations (Anglicans, apparently) views on salvation and the other Christian Religions is, in grand part, about Salvation. The debate is if being a Christian automatically saves someone regardless of their life, or if they have to be good person.

But I must say you were, in part, right about the Roman Catholic position on this. In the past, there was some debate on this, but the side that says that good people won't go to hell just because they never heard of Christian Religions won.

Anyway, Preacher, I'd like to hear what you have to say about the Catholic positions I posted, especially about the non-Christian religions. Also what do you think about Saint Augustine?

But I must thank you, because this thread has been very helpful to me. I've read a lot about Catholicism, and even found a nice forum.
 
Back
Top