Christian Discussion Thread II

[Conscentia]

What? I don't see the problem with his usage of "does".

It should be either "how does Mormonism differ from Christianity" or "how do Mormonism and Christianity differ".

Oh, right...

[Abatael]

What? I don't see the problem with his usage of "does".

It should be either "how does Mormonism differ from Christianity" or "how do Mormonism and Christianity differ".

No, the second one should be, "How does Mormonism and Christianity differ?" It is correct.

You would use the singular verb, because you only make the verb in correspondence with the noun closest to the verb. The noun closest to the verb (differ) is "Christianity." That is singular. You, therefore, use "does" and not "do."

It was correct.

[The United Soviet Socialist Republic]

It should be either "how does Mormonism differ from Christianity" or "how do Mormonism and Christianity differ".

No, the second one should be, "How does Mormonism and Christianity differ?" It is correct.

You would use the singular verb, because you only make the verb in correspondence with the noun closest to the verb. The noun closest to the verb (differ) is "Christianity." That is singular. You, therefore, use "does" and not "do."

It was correct.

Does a little tiny bit of improper grammar really matter?

[Abatael]

No, the second one should be, "How does Mormonism and Christianity differ?" It is correct.

You would use the singular verb, because you only make the verb in correspondence with the noun closest to the verb. The noun closest to the verb (differ) is "Christianity." That is singular. You, therefore, use "does" and not "do."

It was correct.

Does a little tiny bit of improper grammar really matter?

I don't really care, but, when people insist that the correct form is incorrect, and people buy into it, then it matters.

[The United Soviet Socialist Republic]

Does a little tiny bit of improper grammar really matter?

I don't really care, but, when people insist that the correct form is incorrect, and people buy into it, then it matters.

I suppose that is true.

[Sedikal]

I don't see why Christians want to ban gay rights I mean it's not like just because it's legal on earth that the heavenly Defencive line is going to change from lembardi era green bay to Cornel era chiefs.

...not ALL Christians want to quote ban gay rights...that is patently absurd.

Sorry this came late. But it was a joke not ment to be taken serious.

[The Archregimancy]

Forgive my ignorance.... I thought you and I had moved on to discuss the Trinity and it's effect on whether denominations are Christian or not.

Ah, well... I suppose we can discuss that too if you want to. My apologies for any misunderstanding here.

The short answer is that I'm not sure it's entirely my judgement to make.

In any case, let's say - just for the sake of argument - the answer was 'no'...

Officially, Orthodoxy holds that there are 'seeds of the word' in other belief systems; officially Orthodoxy also holds to the possibility of modified apokatastasis, so doesn't inherently deny salvation to the non-Christian.

So I'm not sure it really matters that much so long as they're otherwise basically good people; and I have no particular reason to think that they're not.

[Menassa]

Forgive my ignorance.... I thought you and I had moved on to discuss the Trinity and it's effect on whether denominations are Christian or not.

Ah, well... I suppose we can discuss that too if you want to. My apologies for any misunderstanding here.

The short answer is that I'm not sure it's entirely my judgement to make.

In any case, let's say - just for the sake of argument - the answer was 'no'...

Officially, Orthodoxy holds that there are 'seeds of the word' in other belief systems; officially Orthodoxy also holds to the possibility of modified apokatastasis, so doesn't inherently deny salvation to the non-Christian.

So I'm not sure it really matters that much so long as they're otherwise basically good people; and I have no particular reason to think that they're not.

I remember recently we had a discussion about dual-covenant theology, this is similar to the apokatastais you speak of no?

I was always lead to believe the trinity is an essential part of Christian doctrine and theology, being that Christ must be God in order to truly forgive sin.

[German American States]

Ah, well... I suppose we can discuss that too if you want to. My apologies for any misunderstanding here.

The short answer is that I'm not sure it's entirely my judgement to make.

In any case, let's say - just for the sake of argument - the answer was 'no'...

Officially, Orthodoxy holds that there are 'seeds of the word' in other belief systems; officially Orthodoxy also holds to the possibility of modified apokatastasis, so doesn't inherently deny salvation to the non-Christian.

So I'm not sure it really matters that much so long as they're otherwise basically good people; and I have no particular reason to think that they're not.

I remember recently we had a discussion about dual-covenant theology, this is similar to the apokatastais you speak of no?

I was always lead to believe the trinity is an essential part of Christian doctrine and theology, being that Christ must be God in order to truly forgive sin.

I think the Trinity is more a part of Catholicism and Orthodoxy, not as much Protestant and reformed denominations.

My 100th Post!

[Menassa]

I remember recently we had a discussion about dual-covenant theology, this is similar to the apokatastais you speak of no?

I was always lead to believe the trinity is an essential part of Christian doctrine and theology, being that Christ must be God in order to truly forgive sin.

I think the Trinity is more a part of Catholicism and Orthodoxy, not as much Protestant and reformed denominations.

My 100th Post!

I am well aware.... I was wondering the vitality of it's role in a Christian denomination.

[The Archregimancy]

I remember recently we had a discussion about dual-covenant theology, this is similar to the apokatastais you speak of no?

Not as far as I'm aware; I doubt there's much connection between Origenist apokatastasis and what I understand dual-covenant theology to be; could you elaborate?

I was always lead to believe the trinity is an essential part of Christian doctrine and theology, being that Christ must be God in order to truly forgive sin.

That would be the understanding of most Christian denominations founded before the 19th century; any Church holding to the validity of the Nicene Creed would be hard-pressed to consider a non-Trinitarian denomination as truly Christian. For example, Baptist churches in the United States traditionally expended a lot of time and effort - regardless of what Vazdania seems to think - arguing that Mormons were little better than fringe cultists. Amusingly, Mitt Romney's nomination for the presidency forced a lot of evangelicals into a more than slightly embarrassing volte face over their traditional approach to Mormonism in the closing days of the US election. Evangelical Protestants are still arguing about this; but since I'm not an evangelical protestant myself, I don't really consider their attempt to play theological Twister for the sake of political expediency to be my problem.

And whatever the traditional understanding, as this thread has recently been demonstrating, there's often a lot of quibbling around the edges.

[Vazdania]

Ah, well... I suppose we can discuss that too if you want to. My apologies for any misunderstanding here.

The short answer is that I'm not sure it's entirely my judgement to make.

In any case, let's say - just for the sake of argument - the answer was 'no'...

Officially, Orthodoxy holds that there are 'seeds of the word' in other belief systems; officially Orthodoxy also holds to the possibility of modified apokatastasis, so doesn't inherently deny salvation to the non-Christian.

So I'm not sure it really matters that much so long as they're otherwise basically good people; and I have no particular reason to think that they're not.

I remember recently we had a discussion about dual-covenant theology, this is similar to the apokatastais you speak of no?

I was always lead to believe the trinity is an essential part of Christian doctrine and theology, being that Christ must be God in order to truly forgive sin.

trinitarians -_-

After I read the Bible I always understand Jesus to be a separate entity from God, the Son of God, but not God himself.

[Vazdania]

I remember recently we had a discussion about dual-covenant theology, this is similar to the apokatastais you speak of no?

I was always lead to believe the trinity is an essential part of Christian doctrine and theology, being that Christ must be God in order to truly forgive sin.

I think the Trinity is more a part of Catholicism and Orthodoxy, not as much Protestant and reformed denominations.

My 100th Post!

The trinity is VERY much part of Protestant and Reformed denominations. I have NO idea where you came up with this idea.

[Menassa]

I remember recently we had a discussion about dual-covenant theology, this is similar to the apokatastais you speak of no?

Not as far as I'm aware; I doubt there's much connection between Origenist apokatastasis and what I understand dual-covenant theology to be; could you elaborate?

I was always lead to believe the trinity is an essential part of Christian doctrine and theology, being that Christ must be God in order to truly forgive sin.

That would be the understanding of most Christian denominations founded before the 19th century; any Church holding to the validity of the Nicene Creed would be hard-pressed to consider a non-Trinitarian denomination as truly Christian. For example, Baptist churches in the United States traditionally expended a lot of time and effort - regardless of what Vazdania seems to think - arguing that Mormons were little better than fringe cultists. Amusingly, Mitt Romney's nomination for the presidency forced a lot of evangelicals into a more than slightly embarrassing volte face over their traditional approach to Mormonism in the closing days of the US election. Evangelical Protestants are still arguing about this; but since I'm not an evangelical protestant myself, I don't really consider their attempt to play theological Twister for the sake of political expediency to be my problem.

And whatever the traditional understanding, as this thread has recently been demonstrating, there's often a lot of quibbling around the edges.

Being that apokatastasis is of returning to the original form, perhaps the original covenant Between God and Israelites.... even further between God and Abraham, such is similar with Dual-Covenant theology, which allows one to be a Christian and hold to the covenant of the New Testament and that of the Old.

I'm not really understanding your second point, did the trinity not come from the New Testament? I mean did Tertullian not derive from the New Testament the concept of a Triune-God-Head?

I remember someone saying how this came to be when Christianity left the Hebrew mind and moved more into the Greco-Roman mind.

[The Archregimancy]

I think the Trinity is more a part of Catholicism and Orthodoxy, not as much Protestant and reformed denominations.

This is entirely incorrect.

Excepting some of the Classical Roman heresies, almost (though not quite) all Christian denominations founded before the 19th century are Trinitarian.


Here, for example, is the confession of faith of Thomas Road Baptist Church, the late Jerry Falwell's church:

We affirm our belief in one God, infinite Spirit, creator, and sustainer of all things, who exists eternally in three persons, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. These three are one in essence but distinct in person and function.

We affirm that the Father is the first person of the Trinity and the source of all that God is and does. From Him the Son is eternally generated and from Them the Spirit eternally proceeds. He is the designer of creation, the speaker of revelation, the author of redemption, and the sovereign of history.

We affirm that the Lord Jesus Christ is the second person of the Trinity. Eternally begotten from the Father, He is God. He was conceived by the virgin Mary through a miracle of the Holy Spirit. He lives forever as perfect God and perfect man: two distinct natures inseparably united in one person.

We affirm that the Holy Spirit is the third person of the Trinity, proceeding from the Father and Son and equal in deity. He is the giver of all life, active in the creating and ordering of the universe: He is the agent of inspiration and the new birth; He restrains sin and Satan; and He indwells and sanctifies all believers.

http://trbc.org/visitors/believe/


Here is a Lutheran statement of faith:

Lutheran churches profess that the Holy Scriptures are the source and norm of their doctrine and life. They proclaim the historic, ecumenical creeds of the church – the Apostles’, the Nicene and the Athanasian – which say that God is a Trinity who creates, saves and sustains us.

http://www.lutheran.org.uk/beliefs.php


Here's the Presbyterian Church of Scotland's statement of faith:

We believe in one God:
Father, Son and Holy Spirit,
three persons living in the unity of love.

We praise God the Father:
in love he created the universe through his eternal Word and Spirit;
by his power he sustains and directs it.
He has made us his sons and daughters,
to share his joy and to live together in peace.

We confess Jesus Christ, God the Son:
in love, by the power of the Holy Spirit, he became one of us;
to fulfil the promise to Israel and to reconcile the world with God.
In his life he was obedient to his Father's will;
he forgave sinners, brought hope to the lost,
healed the sick, and set free those who were oppressed.
In his death on the cross he bore the sin of the world;
on the third day he was raised from death by the power of God.
He triumphed over all the powers of evil;
now he reigns in heaven, sharing his risen life with us.

We trust God the Holy Spirit:
in love he calls the Church into being.
He unites us to Christ, in whom we are justified.
He guides our understanding of the Scriptures,
as he also guided and inspired their writers.
He sanctifies us in sacraments,
and imparts to the faithful the fullness of Christ.
He assures us of forgiveness.
He empowers us to be disciples,
embodying the love of Jesus in the Church and in the world.

http://www.churchofscotland.org.uk/abou ... rchs_faith


Here's the opening of the statement of faith from the US branch of the Methodists:

United Methodists share a common heritage with all Christians. According to our foundational statement of beliefs in The Book of Discipline, we share the following basic affirmations in common with all Christian communities:

Trinity
We describe God in three persons. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are commonly used to refer to the threefold nature of God. Sometimes we use other terms, such as Creator, Redeemer, and Sustainer.

That's a fairly resounding set of statements of support for the concept of the Trinity within the older Protestant churches.

[The Archregimancy]

After I read the Bible I always understand Jesus to be a separate entity from God, the Son of God, but not God himself.

Arianism always has been a seductively attractive heresy.

[Farnhamia]

After I read the Bible I always understand Jesus to be a separate entity from God, the Son of God, but not God himself.

Arianism always has been a seductively attractive heresy.

*munches popcorn but longs for the nice lamb kebab snacks and such that we had back in the 4th century when Christological death matches were the national pastime of the Roman Empire*

[Vazdania]

After I read the Bible I always understand Jesus to be a separate entity from God, the Son of God, but not God himself.

Arianism always has been a seductively attractive heresy.

I'm not an Arianist,I'm more of a Non-Trinitaran.

[Farnhamia]

Arianism always has been a seductively attractive heresy.

I'm not an Arianist,I'm more of a Non-Trinitaran.

The followers of Arius were non-trinitarians.

[Vazdania]

To Archy

From Vaz

Subject: I told you so

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints also rejects Trinitarian doctrine, although other churches that are part of the Latter-Day Saint movement still adhere to the Nicene Creed. Joseph Smith taught that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are three separate and distinct entities, with the Father and the Son possessing physical bodies of flesh and bone but the Holy Ghost existing only as a spirit, enabling it to dwell within us. However, Mormon doctrine differs from Arianism in a number of ways, particularly in the doctrines of eternal progression and exaltation.

[Vazdania]

I'm not an Arianist,I'm more of a Non-Trinitaran.

The followers of Arius were non-trinitarians.

He taught it in a very Odd manner. Which i don't believe to be correct.

[The Archregimancy]

Being that apokatastasis is of returning to the original form, perhaps the original covenant Between God and Israelites.... even further between God and Abraham, such is similar with Dual-Covenant theology, which allows one to be a Christian and hold to the covenant of the New Testament and that of the Old.

I think that - wholly understandably - you're giving that a Jewish reading, from the perspective of understanding 'apokatastasis' as meaning 'restoration' in a Jewish theological sense. Though I'd be the first to concede that I may in turn be misunderstanding the Jewish position.

The Orthodox understanding of the word is more along the lines of arguing for the possibility of universal reconciliation, as outlined in its classical formulation by the 6th-7th century theologian Maximus Confessor. Western Christianity has often struggled with the concept, but it's often remained important within Orthodoxy.

[Farnhamia]

The followers of Arius were non-trinitarians.

He taught it in a very Odd manner. Which i don't believe to be correct.

Oh, well, you believe Presbyter Arius to be incorrect. That makes all the difference. I would love to see you dissect Arius' propositions and prove he was wrong, I haven't seen a good Christological argument in 1,500 years.

[The Archregimancy]

To Archy

From Vaz

Subject: I told you so

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints also rejects Trinitarian doctrine, although other churches that are part of the Latter-Day Saint movement still adhere to the Nicene Creed. Joseph Smith taught that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are three separate and distinct entities, with the Father and the Son possessing physical bodies of flesh and bone but the Holy Ghost existing only as a spirit, enabling it to dwell within us.

What on earth are you going on about now?

I outlined all of the above back on page 11 of this thread.

So I fail to see how this could possibly be construed as 'I told you so'.

And since the 14 million members Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints comprise 98% of the LDS Movement, I'm not sure that your making an exception for the 250,000 members of the Trinitarian Community of Christ is wholly relevant here.

However, Mormon doctrine differs from Arianism in a number of ways

Of course it does; especially since Arianism is a classical fourth-century heresy rather than, say, a 19th-century restorationist movement like Mormonism.

When you can show me that I at any point attempted to draw any type of connection between the two, perhaps we can talk.

In the meantime, I'm just going to put you over in that little box where I put all of the other people who can't string a coherent argument across more than one sentence.

[Menassa]

Being that apokatastasis is of returning to the original form, perhaps the original covenant Between God and Israelites.... even further between God and Abraham, such is similar with Dual-Covenant theology, which allows one to be a Christian and hold to the covenant of the New Testament and that of the Old.

I think that - wholly understandably - you're giving that a Jewish reading, from the perspective of understanding 'apokatastasis' as meaning 'restoration' in a Jewish theological sense. Though I'd be the first to concede that I may in turn be misunderstanding the Jewish position.

The Orthodox understanding of the word is more along the lines of arguing for the possibility of universal reconciliation, as outlined in its classical formulation by the 6th-7th century theologian Maximus Confessor. Western Christianity has often struggled with the concept, but it's often remained important within Orthodoxy.

I do regret.... I've been given the basic understanding of perhaps the meaning of the word.

How would it be used concerning Christian doctrine in relation to the trinity?