Why do/don't you believe in a higher power? (Any HP)

[Salandriagado]

I was raised Jewish, I spent plenty of time studying the Torah and other books. The Old Testament is very clear, no one can add to or take away from the word of god and that anyone who attempts to do so should not be followed because they are all false prophets.

And who said that we are adding or subtracting?

Adding 27 entire books to it definitely counts as adding something.

[Korhal IVV]

Which pretty much means that all of the people you mentioned are false Christians or heretics.

Along with the overwhelming majority of all Christians who have ever lived.

Which is true.

Myself.

Tarsonis.

Korhal.

All have sinned in this very thread.

My churchmates, whom I know intimately.

Statistically, at least one is probably a criminal.

Billy Graham (and his son and his son's son)

Who?

John Calvin.

Did a whole bunch of shady shit.

St. Nicholas of Palmyra.

Any that are still alive?

An estimated 630 million around the globe.

Zero of which fit your absurd definition.

Martin Luther.

Jan Hus.

John Wycliffe.

And many more.

Any that are still alive?

Your problem here is that you only have the viewpoint of an outsider.

I love how the arguments have boiled down to shameless No True Scotsmen.

That's basically it. But also, that's basically the only way christians can ever attempt to possess the high ground - by saying that all sub-par christians in history weren't real christians. Never mind the fact that they look like total arseholes while saying that.

What makes you believe that they were rewritten to the point of deviating from the original message?

The fact that every single person doing the re-writing had an inherent vested interest in doing so.

Assuming that taking out a few verses will benefit anyone.

I must have mistated, because here in the Philippines, if a Christian (to be exact, one that is known to be regular in church and all that) is seen drinking, everyone's eyebrows will be raised.

You are talking about a religion that conducts literal ritualised alcohol-drinking every week.

Depends on what kind of church you are talking about.

If we are talking about the Philippine Protestants and Evangelicals, I have never, for some reason, seen them use real wine (probably because it is too expensive as well as the stigma against alcohol in these congregations). I am a member of one of these, btw.

I love how the arguments have boiled down to shameless No True Scotsmen.

That's basically it. But also, that's basically the only way christians can ever attempt to possess the high ground - by saying that all sub-par christians in history weren't real christians. Never mind the fact that they look like total arseholes while saying that.

Except that striving for self improvement is a mark of a true Christian as prescribed by the Bible. And Coruscanti has already repeated that not even Christians are perfect. We are, after all, as defined by Coruscanti's theology teacher, vile wretches saved by grace and justified by faith, whose good works are evidence of transformation from the old to the new.

It isn't no true scotsman. It is basic Christian doctrine. Very basic, actually. A "Christian" who continues in a life of immorality is questionable. Putting "Christian" on your profile doesn't make you one, nor does saying amen or hail Mary. I can go as far as saying that attending the church won't necessarily mean that you are one, either.

It boils down to if you actually understand what Christianity is.

[Coruscanti Nations]

Does stating what I have learned sound like pride to you? You are sounding like a smart shamer.

The phrasing had a prideful tone to the wording of it:

I know for I understand what the Bible's criteria for someone truly in the faith.

And being a "smart shamer" would be a bit ironic for someone in my position. But you don't know me, so I won't blame you for making that mistake.

---

Do I sound like I hate them? Congratulations. I don't. Nowhere did I say "THESE HERETICS MUST DIE" or something. To say that I am being hateful is to have a skewered view point.

One can hate people without calling for their deaths. Again it was the wording of it:

anyone who believes salvation is by works, or denies the divinity of Jesus, or continues living a lifestyle of debauchery whilst claiming to be "Christian", or propogates serious heresies are either questionable or obvious fakes or poor sheep that have been misled.

You don't know me either. Unless if you are a telepathic Sith Lord, you can't really say you know what I felt while writing. I am only being straight forward. That does not equate to hatred.

What, do you want me to sugarcoat the statement so that it sounds less offensive? I, in fact, would rather correct the misled and rebuke the heretic, which is not hate.

What kind of wording would you like that would not require too many more words for me to type in this painfully small touchscreen? Hmm?
Login

[Outer Sparta]

I never really gotten into believing God in the first place. Partly because of how I was raised, partly because I just didn't care.

[New Legland]

3. As God wanted it, slavery wouldn't be completely unfair. It's because humans made it that way.
4. God shows himself to people, and if they don't believe after that it's a choice.
5. God doesn't want people to be afraid of hell..

3. Exodus 21:20-21 "And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money." Suuuuuuuuuure.
4. God hasn't shown himself to me. And if he has, it's not my fault, nor is it my choice, that my requirements for believing are different from those of others.
5. Sounds like God doesn't understand the creatures he's created. Everyone should be afraid of eternal punishment, especially if you can be sent there for something as insignificant as lying, but forgetting to repent.

Geneviev, I'd like a response to this. You've happily responded to almost every other comment that has come your way, so I doubt you missed this (especially since I posted this again), and I really want to know how you feel about these.

[Kowani]

I guess there’s a lot of uneaten porridge going around.

[Thuzbekistan]

Along with the overwhelming majority of all Christians who have ever lived.

Which is true.

All have sinned in this very thread.



Statistically, at least one is probably a criminal.



Who?



Any that are still alive?



Zero of which fit your absurd definition.



Any that are still alive?

Your problem here is that you only have the viewpoint of an outsider.

That's basically it. But also, that's basically the only way christians can ever attempt to possess the high ground - by saying that all sub-par christians in history weren't real christians. Never mind the fact that they look like total arseholes while saying that.

The fact that every single person doing the re-writing had an inherent vested interest in doing so.

Assuming that taking out a few verses will benefit anyone.

You are talking about a religion that conducts literal ritualised alcohol-drinking every week.

Depends on what kind of church you are talking about.

If we are talking about the Philippine Protestants and Evangelicals, I have never, for some reason, seen them use real wine (probably because it is too expensive as well as the stigma against alcohol in these congregations). I am a member of one of these, btw.

That's basically it. But also, that's basically the only way christians can ever attempt to possess the high ground - by saying that all sub-par christians in history weren't real christians. Never mind the fact that they look like total arseholes while saying that.

Except that striving for self improvement is a mark of a true Christian as prescribed by the Bible. And Coruscanti has already repeated that not even Christians are perfect. We are, after all, as defined by Coruscanti's theology teacher, vile wretches saved by grace and justified by faith, whose good works are evidence of transformation from the old to the new.

It isn't no true scotsman. It is basic Christian doctrine. Very basic, actually. A "Christian" who continues in a life of immorality is questionable. Putting "Christian" on your profile doesn't make you one, nor does saying amen or hail Mary. I can go as far as saying that attending the church won't necessarily mean that you are one, either.

It boils down to if you actually understand what Christianity is.

So we gotta be in the in crowd to criticize the in crowd, eh?

[Korhal IVV]

Which is true.



Your problem here is that you only have the viewpoint of an outsider.



Assuming that taking out a few verses will benefit anyone.


Depends on what kind of church you are talking about.

If we are talking about the Philippine Protestants and Evangelicals, I have never, for some reason, seen them use real wine (probably because it is too expensive as well as the stigma against alcohol in these congregations). I am a member of one of these, btw.



Except that striving for self improvement is a mark of a true Christian as prescribed by the Bible. And Coruscanti has already repeated that not even Christians are perfect. We are, after all, as defined by Coruscanti's theology teacher, vile wretches saved by grace and justified by faith, whose good works are evidence of transformation from the old to the new.

It isn't no true scotsman. It is basic Christian doctrine. Very basic, actually. A "Christian" who continues in a life of immorality is questionable. Putting "Christian" on your profile doesn't make you one, nor does saying amen or hail Mary. I can go as far as saying that attending the church won't necessarily mean that you are one, either.

It boils down to if you actually understand what Christianity is.

So we gotta be in the in crowd to criticize the in crowd, eh?

You need to see every perspective before spouting criticism.

[Genivaria]

So we gotta be in the in crowd to criticize the in crowd, eh?

You need to see every perspective before spouting criticism.

You can consider an idea without embracing it.

[Thuzbekistan]

So we gotta be in the in crowd to criticize the in crowd, eh?

You need to see every perspective before spouting criticism.

Been there, done that. You havnt provided a defense.

[Geneviev]

3. Exodus 21:20-21 "And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money." Suuuuuuuuuure.
4. God hasn't shown himself to me. And if he has, it's not my fault, nor is it my choice, that my requirements for believing are different from those of others.
5. Sounds like God doesn't understand the creatures he's created. Everyone should be afraid of eternal punishment, especially if you can be sent there for something as insignificant as lying, but forgetting to repent.

Geneviev, I'd like a response to this. You've happily responded to almost every other comment that has come your way, so I doubt you missed this (especially since I posted this again), and I really want to know how you feel about these.

I did miss it, I'm sorry.

3. The Bible says that all are equal: Rich and poor have this in common: The LORD is the Maker of them all. Proverbs 22:2 and For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise. Galations 3:27-29
4. God shows himself to everyone. And when you see him, then you will have to believe because you saw.
5. People will be afraid of eternal punishment, but they should also look forward to eternal life where they can be with God. God only asks for people to repent of their sins in order to be in the most perfect place for eternity.

[Big Jim P]

I never really gotten into believing God in the first place. Partly because of how I was raised, partly because I just didn't care.

Oddly enough I was raised as a believer. Southern Baptist to be precise. I cannot say if I truly believed or not, as by the time I was mature enough to make my own decisions in the matter I had given up most, if not all Christian Faith.

[Korhal IVV]

You need to see every perspective before spouting criticism.

Been there, done that. You havnt provided a defense.

Really?

Have you looked from the perspective of correct and sound theology?

[Korhal IVV]

I never really gotten into believing God in the first place. Partly because of how I was raised, partly because I just didn't care.

Oddly enough I was raised as a believer. Southern Baptist to be precise. I cannot say if I truly believed or not, as by the time I was mature enough to make my own decisions in the matter I had given up most, if not all Christian Faith.

Meanwhile, here I am, a former atheist that was born to Evangelicals. And then I returned after a few years of disbelief.

[The New California Republic]

You don't know me either. Unless if you are a telepathic Sith Lord, you can't really say you know what I felt while writing. I am only being straight forward. That does not equate to hatred.

What, do you want me to sugarcoat the statement so that it sounds less offensive? I, in fact, would rather correct the misled and rebuke the heretic, which is not hate.

What kind of wording would you like that would not require too many more words for me to type in this painfully small touchscreen? Hmm?
Login

The difference here is that I didn't resort to name calling.

[The Archregimancy]

You don't know me either. Unless if you are a telepathic Sith Lord

Why yes, yes I am.

And I'm currently on the lookout for a new apprentice.


Worried about a pregnant secret wife that you can't let anyone else know about? Have an elevated level of midichlorians? No idea who your father is - or even if you had one? Familiar with desert environments?

TG me...

[The Free Joy State]

Been there, done that. You havnt provided a defense.

Really?

Have you looked from the perspective of correct and sound theology?

So... the argument is that you must agree already with the theology (viewing it as correct implies agreement, after all) before you can agree with the theology?

As an aside, I can't help but notice how -- in some cases -- objectively correct and sound theology aligns exactly with the holder's own opinions (those politically drawn to conservatism seldom seem to accept liberal congregations as the one true and unassailably correct interpretation, for example).

Funny...

[New haven america]

You don't know me either. Unless if you are a telepathic Sith Lord

Why yes, yes I am.

And I'm currently on the lookout for a new apprentice.


Worried about a pregnant secret wife that you can't let anyone else know about? Have an elevated level of midichlorians? No idea who your father is - or even if you had one? Familiar with desert environments?

TG me...

What are the hours and how much is the pay?

[The Free Joy State]

Why yes, yes I am.

And I'm currently on the lookout for a new apprentice.


Worried about a pregnant secret wife that you can't let anyone else know about? Have an elevated level of midichlorians? No idea who your father is - or even if you had one? Familiar with desert environments?

TG me...

What are the hours and how much is the pay?

Does it really matter?

[New haven america]

What are the hours and how much is the pay?

Does it really matter?

I like to know in advance what my prospective employers are offering so I can plan things ahead of time in case I get the job.

[Korhal IVV]

Really?

Have you looked from the perspective of correct and sound theology?

So... the argument is that you must agree already with the theology (viewing it as correct implies agreement, after all) before you can agree with the theology?

As an aside, I can't help but notice how -- in some cases -- objectively correct and sound theology aligns exactly with the holder's own opinions (those politically drawn to conservatism seldom seem to accept liberal congregations as the one true and unassailably correct interpretation, for example).

Funny...

Any theology that is not based on Scripture is heresy.

[New haven america]

So... the argument is that you must agree already with the theology (viewing it as correct implies agreement, after all) before you can agree with the theology?

As an aside, I can't help but notice how -- in some cases -- objectively correct and sound theology aligns exactly with the holder's own opinions (those politically drawn to conservatism seldom seem to accept liberal congregations as the one true and unassailably correct interpretation, for example).

Funny...

Any theology that is not based on Scripture is heresy.

Every other religion that is based on Scripture disagrees.

[The Free Joy State]

So... the argument is that you must agree already with the theology (viewing it as correct implies agreement, after all) before you can agree with the theology?

As an aside, I can't help but notice how -- in some cases -- objectively correct and sound theology aligns exactly with the holder's own opinions (those politically drawn to conservatism seldom seem to accept liberal congregations as the one true and unassailably correct interpretation, for example).

Funny...

Any theology that is not based on Scripture is heresy.

Much theology is based on scripture. It's always the interpretation that's different.

EDIT: I remembered some religions have no holy book

[New haven america]

Any theology that is not based on Scripture is heresy.

All theology is based on scripture. It's always the interpretation that's different.

They're talking about Christian Scripture specifically.

[The Free Joy State]

All theology is based on scripture. It's always the interpretation that's different.

They're talking about Christian Scripture specifically.

Even sticking to Scriptures (large S), it's still all in the interpretation.

Almost every sect, group and denomination will read the same verse differently.