Christian Discussion Thread IV

[Benuty]

To continue steering: TONIGHT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DEATH. What do y'all think about the End Times - how will it come about? How will it pan out?

There won't be an end times. At least not in the way I was taught. People being literally pulled up to heaven and everything.

The left series should not be a source on the ending .

[Othelos]

There won't be an end times. At least not in the way I was taught. People being literally pulled up to heaven and everything.

The left series should not be a source on the ending .

It's not even from that. It's what I was taught in church. lol

[Constantinopolis]

The left series should not be a source on the ending .

It's not even from that. It's what I was taught in church. lol

The heretical notion of the "Rapture" (which, I assume, is what you are referencing) is a hilariously recent invention. It was first invented in the 19th century and did not gain widespread acceptance among American evangelicals until the second half of the 20th century.

http://christianity.about.com/od/faqhel ... ture_3.htm

[Lleu llaw Gyffes]

It's not even from that. It's what I was taught in church. lol

The heretical notion of the "Rapture" (which, I assume, is what you are referencing) is a hilariously recent invention. It was first invented in the 19th century and did not gain widespread acceptance among American evangelicals until the second half of the 20th century.

http://christianity.about.com/od/faqhel ... ture_3.htm

Wow! I thought Rapturism was just regular Mad evil Priests.

Rapturism is defined as Heresy. Glory Hallelujah.
It's nice to see the Church being Good for a change.
Rap

[The Flood]

It's not even from that. It's what I was taught in church. lol

The heretical notion of the "Rapture" (which, I assume, is what you are referencing) is a hilariously recent invention. It was first invented in the 19th century and did not gain widespread acceptance among American evangelicals until the second half of the 20th century.

http://christianity.about.com/od/faqhel ... ture_3.htm

Aye.

The Anti-Christ is also a recent invention, is it not? (by that I mean the common conception of the anti-Christ as some evil opposite of Christ that will come when the world is to end)

[The Archregimancy]

The heretical notion of the "Rapture" (which, I assume, is what you are referencing) is a hilariously recent invention. It was first invented in the 19th century and did not gain widespread acceptance among American evangelicals until the second half of the 20th century.

http://christianity.about.com/od/faqhel ... ture_3.htm

Aye.

The Anti-Christ is also a recent invention, is it not? (by that I mean the common conception of the anti-Christ as some evil opposite of Christ that will come when the world is to end)

Not really.

The concept of an anthropomorphic anti-Christ who will physically rule before his destruction at the Second Coming can be traced back to the earliest centuries of Christianity.

See, for example, the following quote from St. Cyril of Jerusalem (c. 313 – 386).

But this aforesaid Antichrist is to come when the times of the Roman empire shall have been fulfilled, and the end of the world is now drawing near. There shall rise up together ten kings of the Romans, reigning in different parts perhaps, but all about the same time; and after these an eleventh, the Antichrist, who by his magical craft shall seize upon the Roman power; and of the kings who reigned before him, three he shall humble, and the remaining seven he shall keep in subjection to himself. At first indeed he will put on a show of mildness (as though he were a learned and discreet person), and of soberness and benevolence: and by the lying signs and wonders of his magical deceit having beguiled the Jews, as though he were the expected Christ, he shall afterwards be characterized by all kinds of crimes of inhumanity and lawlessness, so as to outdo all unrighteous and ungodly men who have gone before him; displaying against all men, but especially against us Christians, a spirit murderous and most cruel, merciless and crafty. And after perpetrating such things for three years and six months only, he shall be destroyed by the glorious second advent from heaven of the only-begotten Son of God, our Lord and Saviour Jesus, the true Christ, who shall slay Antichrist with the breath of His mouth, and shall deliver him over to the fire of hell.

Lecture XV
On the Clause, And Shall Come in Glory to Judge the Quick and the Dead; Of Whose Kingdom There Shall Be No End

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf207.ii.xix.html

[The Flood]

Encountered an atheist that thinks we should illegalize exorcism.

And they actually wonder why some Christians fear the spread of their ideology.

[Othelos]

Encountered an atheist that thinks we should illegalize exorcism.

And they actually wonder why some Christians fear the spread of their ideology.

The only reason people even thought evil spirits existed in the past, was because they didn't understand mental illness.

[Sun Wukong]

Encountered an atheist that thinks we should illegalize exorcism.

And they actually wonder why some Christians fear the spread of their ideology.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witchcraft ... _in_Africa

Damn right we should.

[Mostrov]

The Church of England slips further into secularism and irrelevance.

Is it time for the living parts of the Anglican Communion - mainly in the Global South - to cast away the dead weight of the CoE yet?

Still recovering from this collective anuerism, as it shows how exactly the church is going to treat traditionalists. There are certainly problems within, but if it can continue limping on it will likely survive - I think the biggest problems will be the relationship between it and the state at the current time.

As for slipping the knot, what exactly would those churches hold that would separate them from any other non-denominational protestant? As it is that or union with Rome, via mede at current is integral to the churches survival.

Encountered an atheist that thinks we should illegalize exorcism.

And they actually wonder why some Christians fear the spread of their ideology.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witchcraft ... _in_Africa

Damn right we should.

To be entirely fair, a lot of this is based of syncretic beliefs - after all early Christianity rejected witchcraft most emphatically, something which I think was lost amongst the superstition of the middle-ages and then once exiled to the America's have returned now armed with super-carriers and a determination to spread their faith.

Of course I'm sure there could be an interesting discussion regarding the function of exorcism (not that it is exclusive to Christianity by any means) and magical thought in early human societies.

[Constantinopolis]

Encountered an atheist that thinks we should illegalize exorcism.

And they actually wonder why some Christians fear the spread of their ideology.

The only reason people even thought evil spirits existed in the past, was because they didn't understand mental illness.

Or maybe it's because evil spirits really do exist, and are a separate thing from mental illness (although often confused in the past).

After all, if exorcism never worked, you'd think people would notice after a few centuries.

Encountered an atheist that thinks we should illegalize exorcism.

And they actually wonder why some Christians fear the spread of their ideology.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witchcraft ... _in_Africa

Damn right we should.

Who, exactly, is this "we"? If I remember correctly, you don't live in Africa. So do you mean that you want your country or some international body to dictate laws to sub-Saharan African states?

That was a popular idea back in the 1880s. You may have heard that it didn't lead to very nice things. In fact, most of the cultural and religious practices widely condemned in Africa today (like the treatment of gays in Uganda) are the direct result of the last time Westerners tried to "fix" African culture.

[Constantinopolis]

The Church of England slips further into secularism and irrelevance.

Is it time for the living parts of the Anglican Communion - mainly in the Global South - to cast away the dead weight of the CoE yet?

Still recovering from this collective anuerism, as it shows how exactly the church is going to treat traditionalists. There are certainly problems within, but if it can continue limping on it will likely survive - I think the biggest problems will be the relationship between it and the state at the current time.

As for slipping the knot, what exactly would those churches hold that would separate them from any other non-denominational protestant? As it is that or union with Rome, via mede at current is integral to the churches survival.

Well, it would be possible to create two separate, parallel Anglican Communions, one traditionalist (composed of the majority of faithful, centered in the Global South, and also attracting traditionalists from the Global North) and the other one composed of the current leadership and mainstream of the CoE and the American Episcopalians.

I'm not saying it would be a good thing, but if things continue on the current path, it may become the least bad option. And you wouldn't need to worry about the two communions existing in parallel for very long, anyway. The liberal one would certainly cease to exist by the end of this century.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

Encountered an atheist that thinks we should illegalize exorcism.

And they actually wonder why some Christians fear the spread of their ideology.

Encountered an atheist that thinks we should illegalize exorcism.

And they actually wonder why some Christians fear the spread of their ideology.

The only reason people even thought evil spirits existed in the past, was because they didn't understand mental illness.

I agree that Exorcism should be mostly outlawed.

Traditionally Exorcism was done very broadly for a variety of reasons. It was and is very dangerous for all parties involved and the victims recipients tended to have the demons driven out on the condition of them winding up dead, than via successful application of the rite/ritual? (someone clarify that for me, please) This is largely do to the fact that the shiny easy exorcism on Supernatural, aren't the reality. Exorcisms can be very long and demanding. Often times what were thought to be possessions were in fact legitimate mental conditions such as Schizophrenia or Parkinsons. Even tetanus would give the appearance of possession. Thanks to many different fields of medical science we now know a lot more than this.


Now setting the Eastern Orthodox aside, (because I don't know their policies on Exorcism) there are really two avenues of approaching exorcisms today. The first one, embraced by those Protestants that have exorcism, and many other religions that perform exorcisms, is much like the old policy. Broad application, little vetting, generally performed by mystic or mystical pastor, and usually is done for "modest" fee. With all the advances of modern science, its no wonder even religious people are skeptical about exorcism with these charlatans roaming about taking advantage of vulnerable people in the name of Jesus. These exorcists aren't necessarily bad people, but have probably bought into their own delusion of casting out demons. This practice is dangerous, damaging to the truth about possessions, and by fostering a view of skepticism can prevent many people of legitimate need from ever getting proper help. These practices should be outlawed.

Conversely the Modern Roman Catholic approach to exorcism is a much more appropriate, dare I say, scientific method fitting of such an advanced age. Firstly, before the Catholic Church will even entertain the notion of possession, the "victim" must go through extensive psychological and medical diagnosis to attempt to find a demonstrable medical reason for their condition. If none can be discerned, Church officials will decide whether or not to conduct an investigation. If they decide to conduct an investigation, the do so very cautiously, first looking for a non-medical logical reason, or with no other possible explanation, make small attempts to agitate the invading spirit with certain non-invasive tests. Only once a possession has been confirmed after all of this will an Exorcist perform the rite until completion. This process, given the level of care and strict scrutiny, should be allowed to continue.

However, thanks to the lovely first amendment, no such laws can ever be enacted. It is both a blessing and a curse.

[Ryfylke]

And you wouldn't need to worry about the two communions existing in parallel for very long, anyway. The liberal one would certainly cease to exist by the end of this century.

Well, since you're certain, I'm sure you wouldn't mind sharing the evidence that's creating that certainty. After all, half the Anglican Communion isn't going to just stop existing because you don't like their endorsement of egalitarianism.

[Sun Wukong]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witchcraft ... _in_Africa

Damn right we should.

Who, exactly, is this "we"? If I remember correctly, you don't live in Africa. So do you mean that you want your country or some international body to dictate laws to sub-Saharan African states?

That was a popular idea back in the 1880s. You may have heard that it didn't lead to very nice things. In fact, most of the cultural and religious practices widely condemned in Africa today (like the treatment of gays in Uganda) are the direct result of the last time Westerners tried to "fix" African culture.

If you remember correctly? I don't recall ever telling you.

No. We: humanity. God forbid I should express an opinion on the torture of children. And yours is a false history, the treatment of Gays in Uganda is mostly a direct result of pre-existing African cultural values, and modern Christian (mostly Pentecostal) evangelism.

[Czechanada]

Can be I NSG's honourary Anti-Christ?

[United States Kingdom]

The only reason people even thought evil spirits existed in the past, was because they didn't understand mental illness.

Or maybe it's because evil spirits really do exist, and are a separate thing from mental illness (although often confused in the past).

After all, if exorcism never worked, you'd think people would notice after a few centuries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witchcraft ... _in_Africa

Damn right we should.

Who, exactly, is this "we"? If I remember correctly, you don't live in Africa. So do you mean that you want your country or some international body to dictate laws to sub-Saharan African states?

That was a popular idea back in the 1880s. You may have heard that it didn't lead to very nice things. In fact, most of the cultural and religious practices widely condemned in Africa today (like the treatment of gays in Uganda) are the direct result of the last time Westerners tried to "fix" African culture.

I am not saying that I don't agree with your last sentence because I do but I have two questions, Are you an African?, second of all how does this relate to the current thread discussion.

EDIT: One more thing, Africans do not condemn the treatment of gays in Uganda. That is a fact that is widely known.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

Can be I NSG's honourary Anti-Christ?

Do you seriously have nothing better to do?

[Czechanada]

Can be I NSG's honourary Anti-Christ?

Do you seriously have nothing better to do?

I can't jump into a discussion here?

[Tarsonis Survivors]

Do you seriously have nothing better to do?

I can't jump into a discussion here?

If I thought you were being serious I wouldn't have said anything. besides, not like you need oue permission to declare yourself the Anti-Christ

[Lleu llaw Gyffes]

I can't jump into a discussion here?

If I thought you were being serious I wouldn't have said anything. besides, not like you need oue permission to declare yourself the Anti-Christ

Postby Czechanada » Mon Aug 04, 2014 8:58 am

Can be I NSG's honourary Anti-Christ?

Czech do so need our permission to be NSG's Anti-Christ.

Set up a thread for nominations. Then a few weeks later set up a poll.

[Constantinopolis]

If you remember correctly? I don't recall ever telling you.

I meant that I seem to remember a thread in which we discussed where we live, and I think you posted there and I'm certain that I didn't see any posts from people who live in Africa. From this (admittedly vague) memory I concluded that you are probably not African.

No. We: humanity.

Ok then, but until we have a single world government (which is inevitable, in my opinion, although it will take centuries), "we"-as-in-humanity cannot actually ban anything.

God forbid I should express an opinion on the torture of children.

You expressed an opinion to the effect that a religious practice should be banned (by all of humanity, apparently) because sometimes, in some places, it is performed in a way that results in the torture of children.

How about we just ban the torture of children instead, and do a much better job of actually enforcing that ban? Also, we should realize that laws are often powerless to stop deeply ingrained cultural practices, and therefore simply banning things is not enough. Education campaigns are just as important, if not more so.

And yours is a false history, the treatment of Gays in Uganda is mostly a direct result of pre-existing African cultural values, and modern Christian (mostly Pentecostal) evangelism.

Every source that I have ever read on this topic has said that anti-gay legislation in Uganda is a legacy of European colonialism. Although, of course, modern Pentecostal evangelism has made the situation a lot worse.

In any case, I only used that as an example to illustrate my point that Western meddling to "fix" cultures in the Global South has usually resulted in tragic consequences.

[The Flood]

Encountered an atheist that thinks we should illegalize exorcism.
And they actually wonder why some Christians fear the spread of their ideology.

The only reason people even thought evil spirits existed in the past, was because they didn't understand mental illness.

I agree that Exorcism should be mostly outlawed.
Traditionally Exorcism was done very broadly for a variety of reasons. It was and is very dangerous for all parties involved and the victims recipients tended to have the demons driven out on the condition of them winding up dead, than via successful application of the rite/ritual? (someone clarify that for me, please) This is largely do to the fact that the shiny easy exorcism on Supernatural, aren't the reality. Exorcisms can be very long and demanding. Often times what were thought to be possessions were in fact legitimate mental conditions such as Schizophrenia or Parkinsons. Even tetanus would give the appearance of possession. Thanks to many different fields of medical science we now know a lot more than this.
Now setting the Eastern Orthodox aside, (because I don't know their policies on Exorcism) there are really two avenues of approaching exorcisms today. The first one, embraced by those Protestants that have exorcism, and many other religions that perform exorcisms, is much like the old policy. Broad application, little vetting, generally performed by mystic or mystical pastor, and usually is done for "modest" fee. With all the advances of modern science, its no wonder even religious people are skeptical about exorcism with these charlatans roaming about taking advantage of vulnerable people in the name of Jesus. These exorcists aren't necessarily bad people, but have probably bought into their own delusion of casting out demons. This practice is dangerous, damaging to the truth about possessions, and by fostering a view of skepticism can prevent many people of legitimate need from ever getting proper help. These practices should be outlawed.
Conversely the Modern Roman Catholic approach to exorcism is a much more appropriate, dare I say, scientific method fitting of such an advanced age. Firstly, before the Catholic Church will even entertain the notion of possession, the "victim" must go through extensive psychological and medical diagnosis to attempt to find a demonstrable medical reason for their condition. If none can be discerned, Church officials will decide whether or not to conduct an investigation. If they decide to conduct an investigation, the do so very cautiously, first looking for a non-medical logical reason, or with no other possible explanation, make small attempts to agitate the invading spirit with certain non-invasive tests. Only once a possession has been confirmed after all of this will an Exorcist perform the rite until completion. This process, given the level of care and strict scrutiny, should be allowed to continue.
However, thanks to the lovely first amendment, no such laws can ever be enacted. It is both a blessing and a curse.

I can agree that only exorcisms as rigorous in their testing as the Catholic Church's policies dictate should be allowed.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

If I thought you were being serious I wouldn't have said anything. besides, not like you need oue permission to declare yourself the Anti-Christ

Postby Czechanada » Mon Aug 04, 2014 8:58 am

Can be I NSG's honourary Anti-Christ?

Czech do so need our permission to be NSG's Anti-Christ.

Set up a thread for nominations. Then a few weeks later set up a poll.

I just meant, those of us here,... in the CDT,

[Constantinopolis]

Now setting the Eastern Orthodox aside, (because I don't know their policies on Exorcism)

The Orthodox Church uses the term "exorcism" to refer to any set of prayers intended to expel demons from a person, location, or object. As such, most Orthodox exorcisms simply consist of a priest saying certain prayers and sprinkling someone or something with holy water, and in the vast majority of cases this is done just in case, not because there is any actual sign of demonic possession. Such "exorcisms" (which other Christians would probably just call prayers) are performed quite liberally on many different occasions. Some people have one performed on a new house before moving into it, for example, and several exorcisms are part of the prayers read during the sacrament of baptism.

But these are "just in case" exorcisms, like I said (in case there happens to be a demon here, get out). As for what happens when there are actual signs of possession, I don't really know. I have never heard of a case of seriously suspected demonic possession. There is a procedure, and I know that it involves some investigation and approval from a bishop, but I do not know anything beyond that.