NATION

PASSWORD

Christian Discussion Thread III

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

What is your denomination?

Catholic
300
31%
Eastern Orthodox
101
10%
Non-Chalcedonian (Oriental Orthodox, Church of the East , etc.)
8
1%
Lutheran
65
7%
Baptist
101
10%
Reformed (Calvinism, Presbyterianism, etc.)
48
5%
Anglican/Episcopalian
61
6%
Restorationist (LDS Movement, Jehovah's Witness, etc.)
19
2%
Non-Denominational
148
15%
Other Christian
130
13%
 
Total votes : 981

User avatar
Grenartia
Post Czar
 
Posts: 40995
Founded: Feb 14, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Grenartia » Tue Jan 21, 2014 11:45 pm

Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
Neoconstantius wrote:Not exactly an anti-LGBT source, and raises some interesting points although with marked confirmation bias
Old but relevant nonetheless

You'll probably pull up the criticism that ensued after ABC aired that 20/20 episode in 2004, so we'll probably just have to agree to disagree here. I think there's more evidence to suggest that homophobia was not the primary factor, but that's my interpretation.



This is why I don't believe in hate crime legislation.


Doesn't make sense.

You're against an entirely positive set of laws that help countless victims of violence and hatred purely because the murder of one person who's murder possibly wasn't entirely motivated by hate? Sounds a bit like throwing the baby out with the bath water to me.
Impeach Humanity, Legalize Death Stars, Life is TheftWis/Gren 2016 Something all cisgender allies should start doing. I wear teal, blue & pink for Swith. ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧
"Don't take life so serious. It isn't permanent."-Dyakovo
I'm a pansexual Androgyne. Also a Christian.
Please use they/them/their when referencing me, as I do NOT appreciate the other pronouns.
Textbook definition of irony
Quotes of awesomeness

User avatar
Vazdania
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 19448
Founded: Mar 06, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Vazdania » Wed Jan 22, 2014 6:13 am

Grenartia wrote:
Tarsonis Survivors wrote:

This is why I don't believe in hate crime legislation.


Doesn't make sense.

You're against an entirely positive set of laws that help countless victims of violence and hatred purely because the murder of one person who's murder possibly wasn't entirely motivated by hate? Sounds a bit like throwing the baby out with the bath water to me.

Hold each person accountable for the crime they committed, not for 'hate'
NSG's Resident Constitutional Executive Monarchist!
We Monarchists Stand With The Morals Of The Past, As We Hatch Impossible Treasons Against The Present.

They Have No Voice; So I will Speak For Them. The Right To Life Is Fundamental To All Humans Regardless Of How Developed They Are. Pro-Woman. Pro-Child. Pro-Life.

NSG's Newest Vegetarian!

User avatar
Tarsonis Survivors
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15693
Founded: Feb 03, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Tarsonis Survivors » Wed Jan 22, 2014 9:25 am

Grenartia wrote:
Tarsonis Survivors wrote:

This is why I don't believe in hate crime legislation.


Doesn't make sense.

You're against an entirely positive set of laws that help countless victims of violence and hatred purely because the murder of one person who's murder possibly wasn't entirely motivated by hate? Sounds a bit like throwing the baby out with the bath water to me.


Except they aren't positive.


1. We already have laws against hate crimes, they're called crimes. You can't murder, assault, torture, harass, rape, etc etc, regardless of motive. The Laramie incident happened before Hate Crime laws existed, yet they're still in prison for 2 consecutive life sentences. What would hate crime laws have accomplished? Absolutely nothing.


2. The Government has no right to pass laws legislating against the way people think.

3. It creates an undue burden on law enforcement and prosecution to prove
what a person was thinking at the time of the act.

4. It now fosters division in society, and resentment across racial, gender, philosophical lines, because now if any crime is committed across demographic lines, hate crime comes into the picture regardless of intent.

5. Ultimately enforcement is politicized and implementation favors minority groups. And any law that adversely affects any demographic group, to a disproportionate amount, whether majority or minority, is ultimately and unequivocally immoral.


Any way this isn't the place to discuss that.
Last edited by Tarsonis Survivors on Wed Jan 22, 2014 9:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Galatians 6:7 " Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
A. Lincoln: "My concern is not whether God is on our side, My greatest concern is to be on God's side."
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
Tarsonis Survivors
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15693
Founded: Feb 03, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Tarsonis Survivors » Wed Jan 22, 2014 9:51 am

Grenartia wrote:
Tarsonis Survivors wrote:


1. They're not mistranslations no matter how you try to convince yourself.

2. Anyway, they reason I made the comment was what we were discussing had nothing tomdomwith homosexuality. And rather than acknowledge the off color but badhumor I offered, you had to make it serious and insert homosexuality into the discussion.


1. Then why, if arsenokoitai refers to gay sex, did Paul have to make it up and use it, instead of the already existing Greek word for it?


Firstly, paiderastia does not refer to homosexual acts in the encompassing act he meant. It refers to Men having sex with young hairless boys, and hairless girls, hairless meaning of the prepubescent kind . So actually, what you claim to be the translation would have more weight if he had used that word, as in temple prostitution these younglings were the typical fare. But, he didn't because, he was not talking about temple prostitution.

Now Simply because any explanation I give wont be as thorough:
Leviticus18:22and 20:13 forbid a man lying with another man as one would with a woman. Leviticus was originally written in Hebrew, but Paul was a Greek-educated Jew writing to Gentiles in Greek, the common language of the day, and probably was using the Greek translation of the Old Testament available in that day, the Septuagint, or LXX, for his Scripture quotations.
The Greek translation of these Leviticus passages condemns a man (arseno) lying with (koitai) another man (arseno); these words (excuse the pun) lie side-by-side in these passages in Leviticus. Paul joins these two words together into a neologism, a new word (as we do in saying database or software), and thus he condemns in 1Corinthians and 1Timothy what was condemned in Leviticus.


It should also be noted, that these two verses are the ONLY places that word is used in the NT. Your argument would have more traction, if there weren't other places in the NT (like Romans) where Paul condemned homosexual acts, and didn't use arsenokoitai.
Grenartia wrote:2. It needn't have been any more than "off color but badhumor" in the same vein as that you offered, but you had to make it serious and complain about me 'always bringing up teh gheyz'.


Fine, lets just move past it, shall we?
Last edited by Tarsonis Survivors on Wed Jan 22, 2014 12:43 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Galatians 6:7 " Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
A. Lincoln: "My concern is not whether God is on our side, My greatest concern is to be on God's side."
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
Czechanada
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14851
Founded: Aug 31, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Czechanada » Wed Jan 22, 2014 9:57 am

Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
Grenartia wrote:
1. Then why, if arsenokoitai refers to gay sex, did Paul have to make it up and use it, instead of the already existing Greek word for it?


Firstly, paiderastia does not refer to homosexual acts in the encompassing act he meant. It refers to Men having sex with young hairless boys, and hairless girls. So actually what you claim to be the translation would have more weight if he had used that word. But he didn't because he was not talking about temple prostitution.

Now Simply because any explanation I give wont be as thorough:
Leviticus18:22and 20:13 forbid a man lying with another man as one would with a woman. Leviticus was originally written in Hebrew, but Paul was a Greek-educated Jew writing to Gentiles in Greek, the common language of the day, and probably was using the Greek translation of the Old Testament available in that day, the Septuagint, or LXX, for his Scripture quotations.
The Greek translation of these Leviticus passages condemns a man (arseno) lying with (koitai) another man (arseno); these words (excuse the pun) lie side-by-side in these passages in Leviticus. Paul joins these two words together into a neologism, a new word (as we do in saying database or software), and thus he condemns in 1Corinthians and 1Timothy what was condemned in Leviticus.


Grenartia wrote:2. It needn't have been any more than "off color but badhumor" in the same vein as that you offered, but you had to make it serious and complain about me 'always bringing up teh gheyz'.


Fine, lets just move past it, shall we?


I agree. Sexuality should never be the domain of Christianity.
"You know what I was. You see what I am. Change me, change me!" - Randall Jarrell.

User avatar
Tarsonis Survivors
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15693
Founded: Feb 03, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Tarsonis Survivors » Wed Jan 22, 2014 10:15 am

Czechanada wrote:
Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
Firstly, paiderastia does not refer to homosexual acts in the encompassing act he meant. It refers to Men having sex with young hairless boys, and hairless girls. So actually what you claim to be the translation would have more weight if he had used that word. But he didn't because he was not talking about temple prostitution.

Now Simply because any explanation I give wont be as thorough:




Fine, lets just move past it, shall we?


I agree. Sexuality should never be the domain of Christianity.



Que?
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Galatians 6:7 " Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
A. Lincoln: "My concern is not whether God is on our side, My greatest concern is to be on God's side."
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
The Holy Church of Arius
Secretary
 
Posts: 39
Founded: Dec 26, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby The Holy Church of Arius » Wed Jan 22, 2014 10:21 am

Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
The Holy Church of Arius wrote:
The Holy Spirit "proceeds" from the Father. Regarding the creation, God said to sent the Son and the Holy Spirit. In Latin the word processio concerns also the mission (which according to Orthodox theology becomes the Son) and the emanation (concerning only the Father) of the Spirit, this idiom is what causes the misunderstanding.



Processio is a noun not a verb. Precedit is the conjugated form of procedere, not processio. You're point is irrelevant.


Who said anything about processio being a verb. And how's my point irrelevant. Care to explain your point?

User avatar
Tarsonis Survivors
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15693
Founded: Feb 03, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Tarsonis Survivors » Wed Jan 22, 2014 10:43 am

The Holy Church of Arius wrote:
Tarsonis Survivors wrote:

Processio is a noun not a verb. Precedit is the conjugated form of procedere, not processio. You're point is irrelevant.


Who said anything about processio being a verb. And how's my point irrelevant. Care to explain your point?



We're discussing the Filioque part of the Nicene Creed. The wording is important.

You said the "The Holy Spirit Proceeds from the father" You then tried to explain it using the noun Processio. But Processio means "The Procession" as in a Funeral Procession, a Parade, etc etc. Your explanation cites the wrong word.

Proceeds is an English word derived from the latin verb Precedere which litterally means "To Go". In the Filioque it is conjugated as Procedit, which litterally translates to Proceeds, but in the context of its root, means to go first or to go from.

Thus, according to the filioque, the Holy Spirit goes from both the Father and the Son. While that is the literal translation, Cyril of Alexandria explains what it infers, that the Holy Spirit proceeds From the Father and the Son, by Proceeding from the father through the son. Just as the Holiest of Holies was cast open following the Death at Calvary, the Holy Spirit now makes its dwelling in the hearts of men because of Christ actions. It is through the Son's actions that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father.
Last edited by Tarsonis Survivors on Wed Jan 22, 2014 10:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Galatians 6:7 " Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
A. Lincoln: "My concern is not whether God is on our side, My greatest concern is to be on God's side."
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
Spiritual Universalism
Attaché
 
Posts: 68
Founded: Jan 09, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Spiritual Universalism » Wed Jan 22, 2014 11:23 am

Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
Grenartia wrote:
Doesn't make sense.

You're against an entirely positive set of laws that help countless victims of violence and hatred purely because the murder of one person who's murder possibly wasn't entirely motivated by hate? Sounds a bit like throwing the baby out with the bath water to me.


Except they aren't positive.


1. We already have laws against hate crimes, they're called crimes. You can't murder, assault, torture, harass, rape, etc etc, regardless of motive. The Laramie incident happened before Hate Crime laws existed, yet they're still in prison for 2 consecutive life sentences. What would hate crime laws have accomplished? Absolutely nothing.


2. The Government has no right to pass laws legislating against the way people think.

3. It creates an undue burden on law enforcement and prosecution to prove
what a person was thinking at the time of the act.

4. It now fosters division in society, and resentment across racial, gender, philosophical lines, because now if any crime is committed across demographic lines, hate crime comes into the picture regardless of intent.

5. Ultimately enforcement is politicized and implementation favors minority groups. And any law that adversely affects any demographic group, to a disproportionate amount, whether majority or minority, is ultimately and unequivocally immoral.


Any way this isn't the place to discuss that.


I agree. Murder is murder, theft is theft and so on. You have the right to self-defence. But you don't have the right to kill in self-defence.
Believe in yourself. Try to perfect your Spirit and then your Soul will ascend to a Higher State of Being.

~Spirit over matter~

User avatar
Tarsonis Survivors
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15693
Founded: Feb 03, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Tarsonis Survivors » Wed Jan 22, 2014 11:35 am

Spiritual Universalism wrote:
Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
Except they aren't positive.


1. We already have laws against hate crimes, they're called crimes. You can't murder, assault, torture, harass, rape, etc etc, regardless of motive. The Laramie incident happened before Hate Crime laws existed, yet they're still in prison for 2 consecutive life sentences. What would hate crime laws have accomplished? Absolutely nothing.


2. The Government has no right to pass laws legislating against the way people think.

3. It creates an undue burden on law enforcement and prosecution to prove
what a person was thinking at the time of the act.

4. It now fosters division in society, and resentment across racial, gender, philosophical lines, because now if any crime is committed across demographic lines, hate crime comes into the picture regardless of intent.

5. Ultimately enforcement is politicized and implementation favors minority groups. And any law that adversely affects any demographic group, to a disproportionate amount, whether majority or minority, is ultimately and unequivocally immoral.


Any way this isn't the place to discuss that.


I agree. Murder is murder, theft is theft and so on. You have the right to self-defence. But you don't have the right to kill in self-defence.


Depends on the situation, but regardless let's not debate this here.
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Galatians 6:7 " Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
A. Lincoln: "My concern is not whether God is on our side, My greatest concern is to be on God's side."
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
Othelos
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12707
Founded: Feb 05, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Othelos » Wed Jan 22, 2014 12:15 pm

Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
Othelos wrote:By "elsewhere", I meant out of other people's lives. Not the CDT.


Fair enough, but that is still Christian Ideals.

Debatable.
Pro: Human rights, classical liberalism, equality, LGBT rights, the EU, capitalism, property rights, innovation, green politics, public transportation
Anti: Autocratic regimes, the Chinese government, leftist "progressivism", identity politics, die Linke/SPD, populism, organized religion, Erdogan, intellectual property theft, assault weapon ownership
Free Tibet and Hong Kong
How China exploits developing countries and undermines democratic institutions worldwide
How chinese espionage and information theft is becoming more sophisticated
How the chinese government encourages espionage among chinese students and expats in Europe

User avatar
Tarsonis Survivors
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15693
Founded: Feb 03, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Tarsonis Survivors » Wed Jan 22, 2014 12:32 pm

Othelos wrote:
Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
Fair enough, but that is still Christian Ideals.

Debatable.


What isn't?
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Galatians 6:7 " Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
A. Lincoln: "My concern is not whether God is on our side, My greatest concern is to be on God's side."
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
Othelos
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12707
Founded: Feb 05, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Othelos » Wed Jan 22, 2014 12:41 pm

Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
Othelos wrote:Debatable.


What isn't?

Some Christians have a more libertarian approach to others' lives based on scripture.

I guess it depends on the person.
Pro: Human rights, classical liberalism, equality, LGBT rights, the EU, capitalism, property rights, innovation, green politics, public transportation
Anti: Autocratic regimes, the Chinese government, leftist "progressivism", identity politics, die Linke/SPD, populism, organized religion, Erdogan, intellectual property theft, assault weapon ownership
Free Tibet and Hong Kong
How China exploits developing countries and undermines democratic institutions worldwide
How chinese espionage and information theft is becoming more sophisticated
How the chinese government encourages espionage among chinese students and expats in Europe

User avatar
Tarsonis Survivors
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15693
Founded: Feb 03, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Tarsonis Survivors » Wed Jan 22, 2014 12:51 pm

Othelos wrote:
Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
What isn't?

Some Christians have a more libertarian approach to others' lives based on scripture.

I guess it depends on the person.


The Church is ultimately (by doctrine, not philosophically), the safeguard and ultimate judiciary of morality. Thus, by Nature it is the Church's place to correct morality. Christians are also called to not necessarily correct and judge as outlined in Mathew 7, but to assist each other to maintain moral practices as deemed by God, and by extension the Church.

There is a constant message of the Church, including the Laity, of being Pastors or more accurately Shepherds. The People of Christ are his sheep, and Sheep require Shepherds not just to protect them from the wolves, but to guide them in the right direction.
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Galatians 6:7 " Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
A. Lincoln: "My concern is not whether God is on our side, My greatest concern is to be on God's side."
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
Spiritual Universalism
Attaché
 
Posts: 68
Founded: Jan 09, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Spiritual Universalism » Wed Jan 22, 2014 2:00 pm

Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
Othelos wrote:Some Christians have a more libertarian approach to others' lives based on scripture.

I guess it depends on the person.


The Church is ultimately (by doctrine, not philosophically), the safeguard and ultimate judiciary of morality. Thus, by Nature it is the Church's place to correct morality. Christians are also called to not necessarily correct and judge as outlined in Mathew 7, but to assist each other to maintain moral practices as deemed by God, and by extension the Church.

There is a constant message of the Church, including the Laity, of being Pastors or more accurately Shepherds. The People of Christ are his sheep, and Sheep require Shepherds not just to protect them from the wolves, but to guide them in the right direction.


When you say "Church" you mean the religious organisation or the total believers that embraces?
Believe in yourself. Try to perfect your Spirit and then your Soul will ascend to a Higher State of Being.

~Spirit over matter~

User avatar
Tarsonis Survivors
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15693
Founded: Feb 03, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Tarsonis Survivors » Wed Jan 22, 2014 2:08 pm

Spiritual Universalism wrote:
Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
The Church is ultimately (by doctrine, not philosophically), the safeguard and ultimate judiciary of morality. Thus, by Nature it is the Church's place to correct morality. Christians are also called to not necessarily correct and judge as outlined in Mathew 7, but to assist each other to maintain moral practices as deemed by God, and by extension the Church.

There is a constant message of the Church, including the Laity, of being Pastors or more accurately Shepherds. The People of Christ are his sheep, and Sheep require Shepherds not just to protect them from the wolves, but to guide them in the right direction.


When you say "Church" you mean the religious organisation or the total believers that embraces?


They are one
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Galatians 6:7 " Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
A. Lincoln: "My concern is not whether God is on our side, My greatest concern is to be on God's side."
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
Spiritual Universalism
Attaché
 
Posts: 68
Founded: Jan 09, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Spiritual Universalism » Wed Jan 22, 2014 2:16 pm

Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
Spiritual Universalism wrote:
When you say "Church" you mean the religious organisation or the total believers that embraces?


They are one


Source?
Believe in yourself. Try to perfect your Spirit and then your Soul will ascend to a Higher State of Being.

~Spirit over matter~


User avatar
Othelos
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12707
Founded: Feb 05, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Othelos » Wed Jan 22, 2014 2:22 pm

Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
Othelos wrote:Some Christians have a more libertarian approach to others' lives based on scripture.

I guess it depends on the person.


The Church is ultimately (by doctrine, not philosophically), the safeguard and ultimate judiciary of morality. Thus, by Nature it is the Church's place to correct morality. Christians are also called to not necessarily correct and judge as outlined in Mathew 7, but to assist each other to maintain moral practices as deemed by God, and by extension the Church.

There is a constant message of the Church, including the Laity, of being Pastors or more accurately Shepherds. The People of Christ are his sheep, and Sheep require Shepherds not just to protect them from the wolves, but to guide them in the right direction.

So, how exactly would you propose morally guiding someone who's biology is different? Abstinence is a policy inviting failure.

And I don't understand why love should be prevented or stopped.
Last edited by Othelos on Wed Jan 22, 2014 2:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Pro: Human rights, classical liberalism, equality, LGBT rights, the EU, capitalism, property rights, innovation, green politics, public transportation
Anti: Autocratic regimes, the Chinese government, leftist "progressivism", identity politics, die Linke/SPD, populism, organized religion, Erdogan, intellectual property theft, assault weapon ownership
Free Tibet and Hong Kong
How China exploits developing countries and undermines democratic institutions worldwide
How chinese espionage and information theft is becoming more sophisticated
How the chinese government encourages espionage among chinese students and expats in Europe

User avatar
Conscentia
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 26681
Founded: Feb 04, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Conscentia » Wed Jan 22, 2014 2:25 pm

Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
Othelos wrote:Some Christians have a more libertarian approach to others' lives based on scripture.

I guess it depends on the person.


The Church is ultimately (by doctrine, not philosophically), the safeguard and ultimate judiciary of morality. Thus, by Nature it is the Church's place to correct morality. Christians are also called to not necessarily correct and judge as outlined in Mathew 7, but to assist each other to maintain moral practices as deemed by God, and by extension the Church.

There is a constant message of the Church, including the Laity, of being Pastors or more accurately Shepherds. The People of Christ are his sheep, and Sheep require Shepherds not just to protect them from the wolves, but to guide them in the right direction.

If people are supposed to be more like Christ, then surely that means that they should be their own shepherds?

User avatar
Tarsonis Survivors
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15693
Founded: Feb 03, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Tarsonis Survivors » Wed Jan 22, 2014 2:32 pm

Othelos wrote:
Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
The Church is ultimately (by doctrine, not philosophically), the safeguard and ultimate judiciary of morality. Thus, by Nature it is the Church's place to correct morality. Christians are also called to not necessarily correct and judge as outlined in Mathew 7, but to assist each other to maintain moral practices as deemed by God, and by extension the Church.

There is a constant message of the Church, including the Laity, of being Pastors or more accurately Shepherds. The People of Christ are his sheep, and Sheep require Shepherds not just to protect them from the wolves, but to guide them in the right direction.

So, how exactly would you propose morally guiding someone who's biology is different? Abstinence is a policy inviting failure.

And I don't understand why love should be prevented or stopped.



Cause Moulin Rouge was a terrible movie.
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Galatians 6:7 " Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
A. Lincoln: "My concern is not whether God is on our side, My greatest concern is to be on God's side."
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
Tarsonis Survivors
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15693
Founded: Feb 03, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Tarsonis Survivors » Wed Jan 22, 2014 2:32 pm

Conscentia wrote:
Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
The Church is ultimately (by doctrine, not philosophically), the safeguard and ultimate judiciary of morality. Thus, by Nature it is the Church's place to correct morality. Christians are also called to not necessarily correct and judge as outlined in Mathew 7, but to assist each other to maintain moral practices as deemed by God, and by extension the Church.

There is a constant message of the Church, including the Laity, of being Pastors or more accurately Shepherds. The People of Christ are his sheep, and Sheep require Shepherds not just to protect them from the wolves, but to guide them in the right direction.

If people are supposed to be more like Christ, then surely that means that they should be their own shepherds?


They are to be both.
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Galatians 6:7 " Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
A. Lincoln: "My concern is not whether God is on our side, My greatest concern is to be on God's side."
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
Tarsonis Survivors
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15693
Founded: Feb 03, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Tarsonis Survivors » Wed Jan 22, 2014 2:36 pm

Spiritual Universalism wrote:
Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
They are one


Source?



I don't have time to educate you on Christianity 101
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Galatians 6:7 " Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
A. Lincoln: "My concern is not whether God is on our side, My greatest concern is to be on God's side."
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
Conscentia
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 26681
Founded: Feb 04, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Conscentia » Wed Jan 22, 2014 2:38 pm

Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
Conscentia wrote:If people are supposed to be more like Christ, then surely that means that they should be their own shepherds?

They are to be both.

Sheep that herd themselves? :eyebrow: That metaphor doesn't really work.
Last edited by Conscentia on Wed Jan 22, 2014 2:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Spiritual Universalism
Attaché
 
Posts: 68
Founded: Jan 09, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Spiritual Universalism » Wed Jan 22, 2014 2:46 pm

Conscentia wrote:
Spiritual Universalism wrote:Source?

I understand he is referring to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_priesthood_(doctrine)


Understandable, but he said:

Tarsonis Survivors wrote:The People of Christ are his sheep, and Sheep require Shepherds not just to protect them from the wolves, but to guide them in the right direction.


He just implies the use of "higher level" priests-believers to "protect from the wolves" and "guide in the right direction". Thus he creates a separation and division already in the community.

So we are not talking about a unity and commonwealth of all believers (in his words "Church"), but the separation between the Shepherds and the rest.

People don't need shepherds, people need to find their own way to the High Truth. No one will tell me what to do and how I will approach the Spiritual. Suggestions yes. But orders or even instructions, no. I believe it's a personal quest.
Believe in yourself. Try to perfect your Spirit and then your Soul will ascend to a Higher State of Being.

~Spirit over matter~

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Arthenius, Dresderstan, Ethel mermania, Fartsniffage, Geneviev, Google Adsense [Bot], Gormwood, Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States, Grinning Dragon, Hediacrana, Heloin, Ifreann, Kernen, Major-Tom, Mexar, Miami Shores, National Astroka, Nerovia, New Ciencia, Ngelmish, Radiatia, Sundiata, Valentine Z

Advertisement

Remove ads