NationStates

Am I the only one who keeps reading the title as Prostitution is not Christianity?

Constantinopolis wrote:

The Union of the West wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't intercession basically asking a saint to pray for someone? Why can't a person just pray directly to God?

We can, and we do. But in addition, we also ask others to pray for us. Sometimes those others are living people, and sometimes they are dead people, such as the saints.

Protestants also ask living people to pray for them. So why be opposed to asking the saints to pray for you as well?

Because God only listens if there are enough people (or the right people) petitioning.

Nationes Pii Redivivi wrote:

Constantinopolis wrote:We can, and we do. But in addition, we also ask others to pray for us. Sometimes those others are living people, and sometimes they are dead people, such as the saints.

Protestants also ask living people to pray for them. So why be opposed to asking the saints to pray for you as well?

Because God only listens if there are enough people (or the right people) petitioning.

So.....because I'm a single non saint, God won't listen to me if I pray right to Him? The Apostles prayed directly to the Lord, why can't we?

Lavan Tiri wrote:

Nationes Pii Redivivi wrote:
Because God only listens if there are enough people (or the right people) petitioning.

So.....because I'm a single non saint, God won't listen to me if I pray right to Him? The Apostles prayed directly to the Lord, why can't we?

I suppose its one of the mysteries of the faith, that God'll listen to Jesus' buddies' prayer, but not us, unless there is enough of us gathered or if you petition a dead fellow to petition to God on your behalf.

Shaggai wrote:

PC World News wrote:
Why is it's head in Rome? because it is a ROMAN church that was established by the ROMANS. Christianity began near 3 centuries before the Roman state established their church.

I'm not saying that Roman Catholicism isn't Christianity. I'm just saying that if people are going to say that Protestants aren't Christians because they reject the "doctrines" of true Christianity, then Catholics should be held to the same standard.

And according to historical accounts like the one I presented earlier, Catholics, in correspondence to their own (or at least the author of this thread's) standards, Catholics are not true Christians.

Of course, I, personally, find this position to be illogical, but that is the position some have taken on this thread in their attempts to make Protestants appear as idolaters.

Ironic, isn't it?

No, it's because Peter went to Rome.

Peter preached and ventured to several places, but the church, itself, was founded by Rome.

The Roman Catholic Church, unless you would like to notify the merriam-webster dictionary concerning it's historical fallacies, was founded by Romans, not the apostles.

That is why it is called the Roman Catholic Church.

Again, I am not saying that the Roman Catholic Church is wrong. I am just saying that it was not the first Church, and thus, in no way, has a right to determine who is Christian and who is not.

Unless of course, they are God, but surely such narcissists do not exist on this forum.

Lavan Tiri wrote:

Nationes Pii Redivivi wrote:Because God only listens if there are enough people (or the right people) petitioning.

So.....because I'm a single non saint, God won't listen to me if I pray right to Him? The Apostles prayed directly to the Lord, why can't we?

Nationes Pii Redivivi was being sarcastic.

But clearly, all Christians - Protestants included - agree that the likelihood of God answering a prayer is increased if the number of people or the intensity of the prayer is increased.

Otherwise, what's the point of asking living people to pray for you, or, for that matter, what's the point of you ever praying for more than a couple of seconds? If the intensity of the prayer doesn't matter, then why isn't every prayer of the form "Hey God, can you do _____ for me? K thx bye." ?

Because, explicitly or implicitly, we all agree that the intensity of prayer DOES matter.

PC World News wrote:

Shaggai wrote:No, it's because Peter went to Rome.

Peter preached and ventured to several places, but the church, itself, was founded by Rome.

The Roman Catholic Church, unless you would like to notify the merriam-webster dictionary concerning it's historical fallacies, was founded by Romans, not the apostles.

That is why it is called the Roman Catholic Church.

Again, I am not saying that the Roman Catholic Church is wrong. I am just saying that it was not the first Church, and thus, in no way, has a right to determine who is Christian and who is not.

Unless of course, they are God, but surely such narcissists do not exist on this forum.

The seat of Rome was established by St. Peter, who was martyred there.

Constantinopolis wrote:

Lavan Tiri wrote:So.....because I'm a single non saint, God won't listen to me if I pray right to Him? The Apostles prayed directly to the Lord, why can't we?

Nationes Pii Redivivi was being sarcastic.

But clearly, all Christians - Protestants included - agree that the likelihood of God answering a prayer is increased if the number of people or the intensity of the prayer is increased.

Otherwise, what's the point of asking living people to pray for you, or, for that matter, what's the point of you ever praying for more than a couple of seconds? If the intensity of the prayer doesn't matter, then why isn't every prayer of the form "Hey God, can you do _____ for me? K thx bye." ?

Because, explicitly or implicitly, we all agree that the intensity of prayer DOES matter.

So God is like the government, if enough people petition, he'll do nothing?

Constantinopolis wrote:

Lavan Tiri wrote:So.....because I'm a single non saint, God won't listen to me if I pray right to Him? The Apostles prayed directly to the Lord, why can't we?

Nationes Pii Redivivi was being sarcastic.

But clearly, all Christians - Protestants included - agree that the likelihood of God answering a prayer is increased if the number of people or the intensity of the prayer is increased.

Otherwise, what's the point of asking living people to pray for you, or, for that matter, what's the point of you ever praying for more than a couple of seconds? If the intensity of the prayer doesn't matter, then why isn't every prayer of the form "Hey God, can you do _____ for me? K thx bye." ?

Because, explicitly or implicitly, we all agree that the intensity of prayer DOES matter.

I was taught that He answers all prayers, but sometimes the answer is "no".

Nationes Pii Redivivi wrote:So God is like the government, if enough people petition, he'll do nothing?

You know, I'm honestly not sure if you're being serious or not... or what your point is.

Nationes Pii Redivivi wrote:

Constantinopolis wrote:Nationes Pii Redivivi was being sarcastic.

But clearly, all Christians - Protestants included - agree that the likelihood of God answering a prayer is increased if the number of people or the intensity of the prayer is increased.

Otherwise, what's the point of asking living people to pray for you, or, for that matter, what's the point of you ever praying for more than a couple of seconds? If the intensity of the prayer doesn't matter, then why isn't every prayer of the form "Hey God, can you do _____ for me? K thx bye." ?

Because, explicitly or implicitly, we all agree that the intensity of prayer DOES matter.

So God is like the government, if enough people petition, he'll do nothing?

Wouldn't God already know what the petition is before it's made?

Lavan Tiri wrote:

Constantinopolis wrote:Nationes Pii Redivivi was being sarcastic.

But clearly, all Christians - Protestants included - agree that the likelihood of God answering a prayer is increased if the number of people or the intensity of the prayer is increased.

Otherwise, what's the point of asking living people to pray for you, or, for that matter, what's the point of you ever praying for more than a couple of seconds? If the intensity of the prayer doesn't matter, then why isn't every prayer of the form "Hey God, can you do _____ for me? K thx bye." ?

Because, explicitly or implicitly, we all agree that the intensity of prayer DOES matter.

I was taught that He answers all prayers, but sometimes the answer is "no".

That's correct. I was just using the term "answering prayers" as shorthand for "granting your request".

Obviously, we all agree that God's decision to grant or not grant your request is influenced to some extent by the intensity of your prayer (which includes the number of people praying). Otherwise, if we didn't believe this, all our prayers would be two seconds long, and we would never bother to pray for the same thing twice.

Constantinopolis wrote:

Nationes Pii Redivivi wrote:So God is like the government, if enough people petition, he'll do nothing?

You know, I'm honestly not sure if you're being serious or not... or what your point is.

And an almighty God would be more likely to listen to the petition of many done publically "as the gentiles do", over a single person's prayer, is simply absurd, is the amount of noise the reaches God ears proportional to his willingness to answer prayer? And, why is Mary's petitioning on your behalf any better than you petitioning him directly, unless you imagine that Saints are little more than secretaries in the Prayer department of God & Son.

Nationes Pii Redivivi wrote:

Constantinopolis wrote:You know, I'm honestly not sure if you're being serious or not... or what your point is.

And an almighty God would be more likely to listen to the petition of many done publically "as the gentiles do", over a single person's prayer, is simply absurd, is the amount of noise the reaches God ears proportional to his willingness to answer prayer? And, why is Mary's petitioning on your behalf any better than you petitioning him directly, unless you imagine that Saints are little more than secretaries in the Prayer department of God & Son.

Nationes Pii Redivivi wrote:

PC World News wrote:
Peter preached and ventured to several places, but the church, itself, was founded by Rome.

The Roman Catholic Church, unless you would like to notify the merriam-webster dictionary concerning it's historical fallacies, was founded by Romans, not the apostles.

That is why it is called the Roman Catholic Church.

Again, I am not saying that the Roman Catholic Church is wrong. I am just saying that it was not the first Church, and thus, in no way, has a right to determine who is Christian and who is not.

Unless of course, they are God, but surely such narcissists do not exist on this forum.

The seat of Rome was established by St. Peter, who was martyred there.

Whatever the reason, it was still established by ROMANS. The reasoning behind it is irrelevant. It was Romans who established the church, Romans who built the cathedrals, Romans who designated the pope and his bishops.

Without Rome, there would be no Roman Catholic Church.
Whether or not Christianity would have existed for as long as it has without Rome is debatable, but make no mistake: Christianity could have survived without the Roman Catholic Church, at least for a time.

After all, it did for three centuries of relentless persecution from the "soon-to-be" catholic state of Rome.

PC World News wrote:

Nationes Pii Redivivi wrote:
The seat of Rome was established by St. Peter, who was martyred there.

Whatever the reason, it was still established by ROMANS. The reasoning behind it is irrelevant. It was Romans who established the church, Romans who built the cathedrals, Romans who designated the pope and his bishops.

Without Rome, there would be no Roman Catholic Church.
Whether or not Christianity would have existed for as long as it has without Rome is debatable, but make no mistake: Christianity could have survived without the Roman Catholic Church, at least for a time.

After all, it did for three centuries of relentless persecution from the "soon-to-be" catholic state of Rome.

And, you forget, almost everyone in the empire was a Roman, so every Christian who converted to the faith was, by definition, a Roman.

Nationes Pii Redivivi wrote:

Constantinopolis wrote:You know, I'm honestly not sure if you're being serious or not... or what your point is.

And an almighty God would be more likely to listen to the petition of many done publically "as the gentiles do", over a single person's prayer, is simply absurd, is the amount of noise the reaches God ears proportional to his willingness to answer prayer? And, why is Mary's petitioning on your behalf any better than you petitioning him directly, unless you imagine that Saints are little more than secretaries in the Prayer department of God & Son.

Tell me something: Why do we go to church? Is it not precisely because it is better to pray with others, "publically", than to pray alone?

What a Christian is, a Christian is not a organization, nor is it a tradition.

A Christian is someone who believes in Jesus historically and Biblically, a Christian believes in the doctrine of Christ, that Jesus is God, and believes that Jesus was persecuted and that Jesus was crucified on the cross shedding his blood to forgive the sins of mankind, and that he was buried, and rose again on the third day.

Whoever believes in Jesus’s death on the cross and resurrection, that he is God, and that Jesus is the only way to Heaven is saved and therefore a Christian!

Christians faith brings about the Holy Ghost, which drives and urges repentance.

So my argument is Protestants are Christians and most of your Catholics are not Christians.

Although I do consider Eastern Orthodox churches Christian, very few Catholics are saved.

Constantinopolis wrote:

Nationes Pii Redivivi wrote:
And an almighty God would be more likely to listen to the petition of many done publically "as the gentiles do", over a single person's prayer, is simply absurd, is the amount of noise the reaches God ears proportional to his willingness to answer prayer? And, why is Mary's petitioning on your behalf any better than you petitioning him directly, unless you imagine that Saints are little more than secretaries in the Prayer department of God & Son.

Tell me something: Why do we go to church? Is it not precisely because it is better to pray with others, "publically", than to pray alone?

I'm sure you have read that one Tolstoy story, about the three hermits and the bishop.

Protestants: Catholics are not Christians!

Orthodox: Protestants are not Christians!

Catholics: Anglicans are not Christians!

*mutual mud slinging* Boooo!

Dainer wrote:Protestants: Catholics are not Christians!

Orthodox: Protestants are not Christians!

Catholics: Anglicans are not Christians!

*mutual mud slinging* Boooo!

If this was five centuries ago, I can assure you it would not stop a mudslinging.

Dainer wrote:Protestants: Catholics are not Christians!

Orthodox: Protestants are not Christians!

Catholics: Anglicans are not Christians!

*mutual mud slinging* Boooo!

Actually many Orthodox I know, such as Brother Nathaniel Kapner considers protestants Christian.

I am a protestant but I like the Orthodox Church.

Nationes Pii Redivivi wrote:

PC World News wrote:
Whatever the reason, it was still established by ROMANS. The reasoning behind it is irrelevant. It was Romans who established the church, Romans who built the cathedrals, Romans who designated the pope and his bishops.

Without Rome, there would be no Roman Catholic Church.
Whether or not Christianity would have existed for as long as it has without Rome is debatable, but make no mistake: Christianity could have survived without the Roman Catholic Church, at least for a time.

After all, it did for three centuries of relentless persecution from the "soon-to-be" catholic state of Rome.

And, you forget, almost everyone in the empire was a Roman, so every Christian who converted to the faith was, by definition, a Roman.

You're right. The only Christians ever to exist at that time were in Rome. No Christians could be found in Israel (Where Christianity began), Arabia, or anywhere else on the planet. Only in Rome, because the bible never talks about the little people who spread the gospel to other nations.

Do you honestly believe that every single Christian missionary went only to Rome? Most did, but few didn't.

To say that Rome was the only place that 100% of all Christian missionaries preached the gospel just simply can't be true.

Rome may have been the first nation to introduce Christianity as a political entity, but it was not the first nation to have Christians in it. That would be Israel.

Just because this isn't noted in the bible, doesn't mean this didn't happen. It just simply means that this isn't noted in the bible (by "this", I mean "the missionaries who preached the gospel to nations other than Rome").

Zanubiyala wrote:What a Christian is, a Christian is not a organization, nor is it a tradition.

A Christian is someone who believes in Jesus historically and Biblically, a Christian believes in the doctrine of Christ, that Jesus is God, and believes that Jesus was persecuted and that Jesus was crucified on the cross shedding his blood to forgive the sins of mankind, and that he was buried, and rose again on the third day.

Whoever believes in Jesus’s death on the cross and resurrection, that he is God, and that Jesus is the only way to Heaven is saved and therefore a Christian!

Christians faith brings about the Holy Ghost, which drives and urges repentance.

So my argument is Protestants are Christians and most of your Catholics are not Christians.

Although I do consider Eastern Orthodox churches Christian, very few Catholics are saved.

On what basis do you define a Christian as someone who believes in the divinity of Jesus?

PC World News wrote:

Nationes Pii Redivivi wrote:
And, you forget, almost everyone in the empire was a Roman, so every Christian who converted to the faith was, by definition, a Roman.

You're right. The only Christians ever to exist at that time were in Rome. No Christians could be found in Israel (Where Christianity began), Arabia, or anywhere else on the planet. Only in Rome, because the bible never talks about the little people who spread the gospel to other nations.

Do you honestly believe that every single Christian missionary went only to Rome? Most did, but few didn't.

To say that Rome was the only place that 100% of all Christian missionaries preached the gospel just simply can't be true.

Rome may have been the first nation to introduce Christianity as a political entity, but it was not the first nation to have Christians in it. That would be Israel.

Just because this isn't noted in the bible, doesn't mean this didn't happen. It just simply means that this isn't noted in the bible (by "this", I mean "the missionaries who preached the gospel to nations other than Rome").

Dear God...do you mean to tell me that you would not consider Apuleius and Josephus Romans? Jesus and all his disciples and the entirety of Christiandom in those early days were, for the most part, restricted to the Roman Empire, and the citizens therein, or "Romans".