The Christian Discussion Thread X: Originally there were 15

[Jack Thomas Lang]

Matthew 5:17-20

It is.

Jesus says that "not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished", which most Christians believe refers to the New Covenant. He also says that he is to fulfill the law, not enforce them. I don't have to tell you what fulfillment means to see how this changes the interpretation.

Regarding the rest, context is important. As in, the context of the quotation in the Bible. Namely that of the Sermon on the Mount. So when Jesus says that if people set aside the "least of these commands", he's referring to the commands he was giving and about to give. Further input by Jesus and the Apostles continue to show how the Judaic laws of the Old Covenant don't apply to Christians. Actual theologians feel free to correct me, but I think I've gotten the basic Christian interpretation right.

[Auristania]

The teaching of the Church is clear on rape, that it is a grave, mortal sin and always evil.

The teaching of the Roman Church is clear on rape, that when a Priest does it, then the Victims commit a grave, mortal sin and are always evil.

[Auristania]

Which implies you’re reading it wrong, more than anything.

“So children what’s the lesson we learn from the story of Jacob and Rachel? You can never trust an employer.”-

If I were a rich man deedle deedle digh

[Tarsonis]

The teaching of the Church is clear on rape, that it is a grave, mortal sin and always evil.

The teaching of the Roman Church is clear on rape, that when a Priest does it, then the Victims commit a grave, mortal sin and are always evil.

No. No it isn’t.

[Philjia]

The teaching of the Church is clear on rape, that it is a grave, mortal sin and always evil.

The teaching of the Roman Church is clear on rape, that when a Priest does it, then the Victims commit a grave, mortal sin and are always evil.

(But it might be best if you moved to another diocese, Father)

[Farnhamia]

The teaching of the Church is clear on rape, that it is a grave, mortal sin and always evil.

The teaching of the Roman Church is clear on rape, that when a Priest does it, then the Victims commit a grave, mortal sin and are always evil.

The teaching of the Roman Church is clear on rape, that when a Priest does it, then the Victims commit a grave, mortal sin and are always evil.

(But it might be best if you moved to another diocese, Father)

Auristania, Philjia ... *** warned for trolling. ***

[Hakons]

As a former Christian, surely you know the most basic theological distinction between the Old Law and the New Law that is propagated by the Church. In fact, I think you do know and are just posting this to annoy us. The teaching of the Church is clear on rape, that it is a grave, mortal sin and always evil.

I do. I also know it’s bullshit. Those who break even a letter of the old law will be called least in heaven.

I love how I’ve gotten three conflicting apologetics from three different people. That’s how you know you have an excellent scripture: even its defenders can’t agree on basic details.

Christian theology 101 isn't "bullshit," my goodness. My apologetic didn't even conflict with the other's explanations. Stating the obvious, that Christians believe and follow different things than the Levitical Law, doesn't contradict people explaining what that passage means (since your interpretation of it was biased and not in line with its historical interpretation). Regardless, people have different opinions on everything. People having a different opinion or interpretation on something doesn't preclude to it being badly designed or erroneous. Most Christians aren't Sola Scriptura (doctrine only comes from the Bible) either. We have Church teaching on the matter, and it directly contradicts your claim on the interpenetration and application of scripture. Arguing like sola scriptura fundamentalists has always been a detriment to atheist arguments.

That the purpose of the law has been fulfilled by Christ? Look, this doesn't mean we practice or are supposed to practice Levitical law. In fact throughout the Gospels and in the Epistles, it is suggested otherwise.

Christ fulfilled the sacrifical law in accordance with the later destruction of the temple. He did not fulfill moral obligations or regulations. The case I described was clearly a regulation.

That's blatantly an incorrect understanding. It is true that Christ fulfilled the ceremonial, sacrificial law, and did not overturn the moral law. Thus, it is obviously incorrect to say this forces us to assume every levitical code and regulation, since the various punishments for things are part of the ceremonial law. The passage that you referenced was a legal code, which Christians don't follow and never have. You're not the arbitrator of what Christians believe, and trying to project what you want us to believe (though it is rather strange you want Christians to be okay with rape) doesn't change our position. Rape is a mortal sin (meaning cause for eternal damnation) that is profoundly evil.

[Vendellamoore]

I am Presbyterian

Bet nobody expected that

[Salus Maior]

That the purpose of the law has been fulfilled by Christ? Look, this doesn't mean we practice or are supposed to practice Levitical law. In fact throughout the Gospels and in the Epistles, it is suggested otherwise.

Christ fulfilled the sacrifical law in accordance with the later destruction of the temple. He did not fulfill moral obligations or regulations. The case I described was clearly a regulation.

....Christ didn't destroy the Temple, so no.

[Salus Maior]

I am Presbyterian

Bet nobody expected that

Nobody expects the Presbyterian Inquisition?

[Locus Praemonstratus]

Though it goes without saying, I was incidentally reading a sermon delivered to priests at a Roman Synod by Pope Innocent III, and the conclusion is, of course, that priests are more at fault for sin, what is venial for the laity is mortal for the clergy. I think it elucidates the Catholic position pretty well, so here’s a collection of excerpts from the sermon.

If the Priest, who is anointed, sins, making the people guilty, he will offer to the Lord for his sin a young bull without blemish, and he will lead it to the door of the tabernacle of testimony before the Lord, and place his hands on its head, and sacrifice it to the Lord. (Leviticus 3:4

As the sin of the priest is described first, so it is judged to be the gravest, due both to dignity of his office and to the perversity of his example. The first... If the priest, who is anointed, sins; the second... making the people guilty. As Juvenal’s satire, “The greater the offender, the more conspicuous is every vice of the heart.”

Many actions are trifling for subordinates that are serious for prelates, and many sins are venial for the laity that are mortal sins for the clergy... Certainly, the higher the status, the heavier the fall, for to whom more is entrusted, from him more is demanded.

How is it that by your sin you make the people guilty? Through you “the name of God is blasphemed among the nations,” for “The son can do only what he sees the father doing,” and he offers in excuse, “It is enough for the disciple if he is like his master.”

The layman asks, why not commit adultery, when the priest fornicates? Why not commit usury, when the priest is a usurer? Assuredly the priest is worthy of as many deaths as the examples of moral ruin he give to the people.

The young bull without blemish symbolises the contrite spirit, since “An afflicted spirit is a sacrifice to God, and God does not despise a contrite and humble heart.”

Therefore, dearest brothers, let us live our lives not only blamelessly, but also prudently

[Leutria]

I am Presbyterian

Bet nobody expected that

Nobody expects the Presbyterian Inquisition?

Least of all the Presbyterians. By the time we finish with committee meetings the accused would have died of old age!

[Vendellamoore]

Nobody expects the Presbyterian Inquisition?

Least of all the Presbyterians. By the time we finish with committee meetings the accused would have died of old age!

What? I'll have you know I am a fierce Presbyterian, and a proud one.
Also what committee

[State of Turelisa]

I think he means a Consistory.

[Lower Nubia]

Which implies you’re reading it wrong, more than anything.

“Ah yeah, they’re allowed to take virgin girls. Wait, why does it matter that they’re virgin? Well, I better just turn off that thinking switch, I’m not allowed to think about that.”

“Ah here’s a man that thinks if someone’s a virgin the connotation for their capture is sexual, as opposed to other more tame expressions within ancient cultures of humanity, like purity, honour, or the sacred.”

[Leutria]

Least of all the Presbyterians. By the time we finish with committee meetings the accused would have died of old age!

What? I'll have you know I am a fierce Presbyterian, and a proud one.
Also what committee

Days late, but I am a Presbyterian too. As my childhood minister would say, our greatest strength is we have a lot of people to make decisions, and our greatest weakness is we have a lot of people to make decisions. (Maybe the Presbyterian Church in Canada that is more relevant?)

[Lower Nubia]

What? I'll have you know I am a fierce Presbyterian, and a proud one.
Also what committee

Days late, but I am a Presbyterian too. As my childhood minister would say, our greatest strength is we have a lot of people to make decisions, and our greatest weakness is we have a lot of people to make decisions. (Maybe the Presbyterian Church in Canada that is more relevant?)

I thought the greatest weakness was the generally uninspiring nature of the Scottish Church?

[Salus Maior]

Days late, but I am a Presbyterian too. As my childhood minister would say, our greatest strength is we have a lot of people to make decisions, and our greatest weakness is we have a lot of people to make decisions. (Maybe the Presbyterian Church in Canada that is more relevant?)

I thought the greatest weakness was the generally uninspiring nature of the Scottish Church?

Can't speak for the Scottish Church, but honestly one of my best experiences of a Protestant church was in a Presbyterian church that my friends attend. It was pretty traditional for a Protestant church, but not harshly so.

That being said of course, I believe that the Catholic mass contains the fullness of Christian practice as far as services go.

[Lower Nubia]

I thought the greatest weakness was the generally uninspiring nature of the Scottish Church?

Can't speak for the Scottish Church, but honestly one of my best experiences of a Protestant church was in a Presbyterian church that my friends attend. It was pretty traditional for a Protestant church, but not harshly so.

That being said of course, I believe that the Catholic mass contains the fullness of Christian practice as far as services go.

Seeing as it’s in rapid decline (even for other Western churches) I’m assuming it’s about as inspiring as watching paint dry.

A little stat for that decline.

[Vendellamoore]

What? I'll have you know I am a fierce Presbyterian, and a proud one.
Also what committee

Days late, but I am a Presbyterian too. As my childhood minister would say, our greatest strength is we have a lot of people to make decisions, and our greatest weakness is we have a lot of people to make decisions. (Maybe the Presbyterian Church in Canada that is more relevant?)

My beliefs align with PCA or OPC.

[Tarsonis]

Days late, but I am a Presbyterian too. As my childhood minister would say, our greatest strength is we have a lot of people to make decisions, and our greatest weakness is we have a lot of people to make decisions. (Maybe the Presbyterian Church in Canada that is more relevant?)

My beliefs align with PCA or OPC.

Meaning?

[Vendellamoore]

My beliefs align with PCA or OPC.

Meaning?

Meaning I'm extremely conservative, and so is my church.

[Tarsonis]

Meaning?

Meaning I'm extremely conservative, and so is my church.

But what defines PCA beliefs compared to others?

[Haasian Socialism]

I thought the greatest weakness was the generally uninspiring nature of the Scottish Church?

Can't speak for the Scottish Church, but honestly one of my best experiences of a Protestant church was in a Presbyterian church that my friends attend. It was pretty traditional for a Protestant church, but not harshly so.

That being said of course, I believe that the Catholic mass contains the fullness of Christian practice as far as services go.

Earlier in my faith I believed the Catholics were weird, but I have come to realize that as long as you worship Christ in a way that he said to, it doesn’t matter how you do it.

“May the Lord keep you, and bless you, and show his face to you.”
-Numbers 6:24-26

[Pacomia]

The other day a Christian came into the Atheist discussion thread and asked what made us atheist. That made me sort of curious- what made you Christian? Were you born Christian, or was there some event that made you Christian?