Christian Discussion Thread XII: Soter? I hardly know her!

[Immortan Khan]

I was 10, until I was 11.

I'm still 10, even at 32

Huh, I thought you were in your early 40's.

[Lower Nubia]

I was 10, until I was 11.

I'm still 10, even at 32

Is this failing 1 Corinthians 13:11, or fulfilling Matthew 18:3?

[Tarsonis]

I'm still 10, even at 32

Is this failing 1 Corinthians 13:11, or fulfilling Matthew 18:3?

"When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up." - CS Lewis

[Lower Nubia]

Is this failing 1 Corinthians 13:11, or fulfilling Matthew 18:3?

"When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up." - CS Lewis

C.S. Lewis desires to pay taxes. Just jotting that down.

[Sundiata]

"When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up." - CS Lewis

C.S. Lewis desires to pay taxes. Just jotting that down.

Render unto Caesar...

[Lower Nubia]

C.S. Lewis desires to pay taxes. Just jotting that down.

Render unto Caesar...

Christian Libertarians right now:

[Salus Maior]

Render unto Caesar...

Christian Libertarians right now:

Every man a Caesar?

[Lower Nubia]

Christian Libertarians right now:

Every man a Caesar?

If every man is caesar, who is there that can render?

[Kowani]

Every man a Caesar?

If every man is caesar, who is there that can render?

christian socialists have found their new doctrine

[Neanderthaland]

Render unto Caesar...

Christian Libertarians right now:

Renter under Caesar.

[Lord Dominator]

Render unto Caesar...

Christian Libertarians right now:

The sub group of that who are particularly literalist: Caesar is dead

[Hispida]

Christian Libertarians right now:

The sub group of that who are particularly literalist: Caesar is dead

murdered on the senate floor by his own countrymen, requiescat in pace: non dimiseritis, non obliviscar

[The Archregimancy]

The sub group of that who are particularly literalist: Caesar is dead

murdered on the senate floor by his own countrymen, requiescat in pace: non dimiseritis, non obliviscar

Wrong Caesar.

Tiberius Caesar Augustus (r. AD 14 - AD 37) was emperor during Jesus's adult life. The precise details are unclear, but the elderly Tiberius was likely smothered in his bed by either Caligula or Praetorian commander Macro. It seems that everyone thought Tiberius had died in bed, and were busy congratulating Caligula on his accession to power, when Tiberius unexpectedly rallied and Macro and/or Caligula decided to finish him off rather than risk the consequences of a full recovery.

[Hispida]

murdered on the senate floor by his own countrymen, requiescat in pace: non dimiseritis, non obliviscar

Wrong Caesar.

Tiberius Caesar Augustus (r. AD 14 - AD 37) was emperor during Jesus's adult life. The precise details are unclear, but the elderly Tiberius was likely smothered in his bed by either Caligula or Praetorian commander Macro. It seems that everyone thought Tiberius had died in bed, and were busy congratulating Caligula on his accession to power, when Tiberius unexpectedly rallied and Macro and/or Caligula decided to finish him off rather than risk the consequences of a full recovery.

...
...
my point stands

[Australian rePublic]

Seriously though, why does God pretend to hate conflict? God can talk all He wants about hating conflict, but in the end, words are words are absolutely usless, especially for an omnipotent. I mean us humans could use words in order to try to achieve or hope for something, or work together to achieve something, but God is different as he's omnipotent. As I was always say, words are useless and actions are what matters.

God's actions are those of someone who loves conflict. It's one thing to allow conflict and another to actively encourage it. God's actions seem to do that later. Why doesn't He jist admit He loves conflict, and stop pretending that He doesn't. God's actions actively encourage conflict, and words are uselsss in comparison to actions. So why pretend He hates conflict? I don't get it

[Samudera Darussalam]

Seriously though, why does God pretend to hate conflict? God can talk all He wants about hating conflict, but in the end, words are words are absolutely usless, especially for an omnipotent. I mean us humans could use words in order to try to achieve or hope for something, or work together to achieve something, but God is different as he's omnipotent. As I was always say, words are useless and actions are what matters.

God's actions are those of someone who loves conflict. It's one thing to allow conflict and another to actively encourage it. God's actions seem to do that later. Why doesn't He jist admit He loves conflict, and stop pretending that He doesn't. God's actions actively encourage conflict, and words are uselsss in comparison to actions. So why pretend He hates conflict? I don't get it

As a Muslim, that's a question that sometimes I struggle to know the answer too. Does God want us to just....actively trying to prevent conflict and make peace with each other even if the situation encourages humans to do the opposite?

[Page]

I'd love to hear to the input of Christians here on whether you think inter-religious relationships can work. My mom wants to be a matchmaker between my cousin (F28 moderate Pentecostal) and my best friend (M30 atheist) and I think it's a disaster waiting to happen. Neither of them would ever be converted.

See, from my atheistic perspective, if I had a Christian partner, even if they weren't trying to convert me and even if we just never discussed religion or interfered with each other, it would bother me that my partner thinks 1) I'm going to hell and 2) I deserve it. (I know, we all deserve it but we can accept the free gift of salvation, I grew up Catholic don't need a theology lesson.)

I have another Christian friend who had successful relationships with secular people but he is of Unitarian Universalist leanings so I don't think that really "counts."

Anyway with my friend and cousin, the sad thing is if not for the religion issue it could possibly work but I think it's insurmountable. What are your perspectives on secular partners?

[Immortan Khan]

I'd love to hear to the input of Christians here on whether you think inter-religious relationships can work. My mom wants to be a matchmaker between my cousin (F28 moderate Pentecostal) and my best friend (M30 atheist) and I think it's a disaster waiting to happen. Neither of them would ever be converted.

They can work depending on the religious beliefs and cultural background of the people. To be frank though, I don't think a Pentecostal and atheist relationship will work out.

See, from my atheistic perspective, if I had a Christian partner, even if they weren't trying to convert me and even if we just never discussed religion or interfered with each other, it would bother me that my partner thinks 1) I'm going to hell and 2) I deserve it. (I know, we all deserve it but we can accept the free gift of salvation, I grew up Catholic don't need a theology lesson.)

You're assuming that all Christians believe all atheists automatically go to Hell.

I have another Christian friend who had successful relationships with secular people but he is of Unitarian Universalist leanings so I don't think that really "counts."

Well to be blunt Unitarian Universalists aren't Christian even though their movement does have its origins in liberal Christianity.

Anyway with my friend and cousin, the sad thing is if not for the religion issue it could possibly work but I think it's insurmountable. What are your perspectives on secular partners?

Used to not be a problem, now it could be.

[Lady Victory]

Seriously though, why does God pretend to hate conflict? God can talk all He wants about hating conflict, but in the end, words are words are absolutely usless, especially for an omnipotent. I mean us humans could use words in order to try to achieve or hope for something, or work together to achieve something, but God is different as he's omnipotent. As I was always say, words are useless and actions are what matters.

God's actions are those of someone who loves conflict. It's one thing to allow conflict and another to actively encourage it. God's actions seem to do that later. Why doesn't He jist admit He loves conflict, and stop pretending that He doesn't. God's actions actively encourage conflict, and words are uselsss in comparison to actions. So why pretend He hates conflict? I don't get it

I feel like you're probably overthinking this.

[Lower Nubia]

Seriously though, why does God pretend to hate conflict? God can talk all He wants about hating conflict, but in the end, words are words are absolutely usless, especially for an omnipotent. I mean us humans could use words in order to try to achieve or hope for something, or work together to achieve something, but God is different as he's omnipotent. As I was always say, words are useless and actions are what matters.

God's actions are those of someone who loves conflict. It's one thing to allow conflict and another to actively encourage it. God's actions seem to do that later. Why doesn't He jist admit He loves conflict, and stop pretending that He doesn't. God's actions actively encourage conflict, and words are uselsss in comparison to actions. So why pretend He hates conflict? I don't get it

If God loved conflicts then the end supposed in revelation would be a new conflict, rather than the total eradication of conflict. God himself utilises conflict to do his will, but conflicts themselves arise because the people in the creation are evil and engage in conflict quite naturally. When God utilises a conflict, it’s quite clear that God means to first not to engage in conflict, and then only does so when the grace “period” is over. An example is prior to the Israeli conquest of the promised land, God states to Abraham:

“And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years; And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge: and afterward shall they come out with great substance. And thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou shalt be buried in a good old age. But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full.”

I.e, Abraham cannot conquer/settle the land because those living their were not actually evil enough to be dealt with. This actually gave the Amorites (and their descendants when Moses arrives) 400 years to change and, of course, they did not leading Joshua to conquer the land some time later. Of important note, again, the Israelites wander a desert for 40 years prior to the invasion, giving plenty of time for those states in the land to leave or for families there to leave and flee to other land before conquest. Of course, we know again, they did not leave and believed they could, foolishly, win.

When the conquest finally happens plenty of city states continue to remain in the land rather than fleeing, even as news of a conquering army from the south permeates the entire area, they remain. Time and time again plenty of time is given to those present to leave the land, they simply refuse to do so, which is a classic example of pride.

The whole of the Holy land could of been taken Without a drop of blood, and those smart enough would of seen that and left, but, again, we know they did not, and continued to believe they could win, which was obviously foolish.

In all the tales of conquest, it’s not God waltzing into a Christian neighbourhood and cutting heads. Each case is a genuinely evil place. Even from a secular perspective the Canaanite were evil. They were considered evil even by the Babylonians and the Egyptians, and those two didn’t fuck around when it came to innovative nastiness. Think of it like the national guard walking into a riot of murderers, rapists, and looters. We wouldn’t have too much concern if the rioters are attacking an innocent group and the guard attacked the rioters to defend that group. Yet the guard in this instance would kill the rioters, and that is still conflict - even though it may be for a good cause.

It’s simply a necessity of our condition. When the conflicts fail, or evil is done within them, it’s because the people (and all their sinfulness) have perpetuated further evil within the conflict, rather than something by Gods hand.

[Sundiata]

I'd love to hear to the input of Christians here on whether you think inter-religious relationships can work.

I don't think it's a good idea to be quite honest unless one of them is willing to convert.

[Benuty]

I'd love to hear to the input of Christians here on whether you think inter-religious relationships can work. My mom wants to be a matchmaker between my cousin (F28 moderate Pentecostal) and my best friend (M30 atheist) and I think it's a disaster waiting to happen. Neither of them would ever be converted.

They can work depending on the religious beliefs and cultural background of the people. To be frank though, I don't think a Pentecostal and atheist relationship will work out.

See, from my atheistic perspective, if I had a Christian partner, even if they weren't trying to convert me and even if we just never discussed religion or interfered with each other, it would bother me that my partner thinks 1) I'm going to hell and 2) I deserve it. (I know, we all deserve it but we can accept the free gift of salvation, I grew up Catholic don't need a theology lesson.)

You're assuming that all Christians believe all atheists automatically go to Hell.

I have another Christian friend who had successful relationships with secular people but he is of Unitarian Universalist leanings so I don't think that really "counts."

Well to be blunt Unitarian Universalists aren't Christian even though their movement does have its origins in liberal Christianity.

Anyway with my friend and cousin, the sad thing is if not for the religion issue it could possibly work but I think it's insurmountable. What are your perspectives on secular partners?

Used to not be a problem, now it could be.

Yeah, a pentecostal, and an atheist relationship is...an interesting issue to say the least. A Pentecostal's very nature involves heavy evangelization that would make other Christians uncomfortable let alone an atheist.

[North Washington Republic]

They can work depending on the religious beliefs and cultural background of the people. To be frank though, I don't think a Pentecostal and atheist relationship will work out.

You're assuming that all Christians believe all atheists automatically go to Hell.

Well to be blunt Unitarian Universalists aren't Christian even though their movement does have its origins in liberal Christianity.

Used to not be a problem, now it could be.

Yeah, a pentecostal, and an atheist relationship is...an interesting issue to say the least. A Pentecostal's very nature involves heavy evangelization that would make other Christians uncomfortable let alone an atheist.

As a former Pentecostal, i have to agree. Proselytizing is encouraged in Pentecostalism. There is heavy amount of peer pressure when a non-Pentecostal attends a service. Pressure to speak in tongues, to be “slain in the spirit”, etc. VERY cult like

[Salus Maior]

Well, got my shot of depression today.

[Salus Maior]

Yeah, a pentecostal, and an atheist relationship is...an interesting issue to say the least. A Pentecostal's very nature involves heavy evangelization that would make other Christians uncomfortable let alone an atheist.

As a former Pentecostal, i have to agree. Proselytizing is encouraged in Pentecostalism. There is heavy amount of peer pressure when a non-Pentecostal attends a service. Pressure to speak in tongues, to be “slain in the spirit”, etc. VERY cult like

Also a former Pentecostal.

Let's not paint with too much of a broad brush here. Things like the "Gifts of the Holy Spirit" are encouraged in the denomination, yes (although they seem to only focus on tongues and prophecy), but I was never really pressured to do these things in the congregation I was in. Granted, my quietness stood out in the congregation, but I was never treated unkindly for it. My mom and my sisters are still Pentecostal/Non Denom, but aside from one of my sisters, they've been supportive of me converting to Catholicism and remaining Catholic.

Like almost any denomination, you can have good sorts and bad sorts. People who are motivated by their faith to be positive and good people, or the alternative. This is as true of Pentecostalism as it is of Catholicism or Orthodoxy.