NATION

PASSWORD

Christian Discussion Thread VIII: Augustine's Revenge.

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

What is your denomination?

Roman Catholic
268
36%
Eastern Orthodox
66
9%
Non-Chalcedonian (Oriental Orthodox, Church of the East, etc.)
4
1%
Anglican/Episcopalian
36
5%
Lutheran or Reformed (including Calvinist, Presbyterian, etc.)
93
12%
Methodist
33
4%
Baptist
67
9%
Other Evangelical Protestant (Pentecostal, Charismatic, etc.)
55
7%
Restorationist (LDS Movement, Jehovah's Witness, etc.)
22
3%
Other Christian
101
14%
 
Total votes : 745

User avatar
Tarsonis Survivors
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15674
Founded: Feb 03, 2009
Left-Leaning College State

Christian Discussion Thread VIII: Augustine's Revenge.

Postby Tarsonis Survivors » Fri Sep 30, 2016 4:05 pm

This is the eighth version of the Christian discussion thread, where participants can discuss Christianity in general, the differences between the denominations, general comparative theology (both within and without Christianity), Church history, and many other topics.

While discussion naturally covers a broad range of themes, members of the moderation team (including those participating in the thread), may occasionally gently suggest that some topics might be best taken to a separate thread; this will usually only occur when a subject is itself the subject of discussion in recurring separate NSG threads and would risk dominating this thread if discussed here (examples include, but are not limited to, abortion, homosexuality, and/or the existence of the historical Jesus).

Mod Edit: Link to the last one: viewtopic.php?ns=1&f=20&t=373639
Last edited by Farnhamia on Fri Sep 30, 2016 5:47 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
Salus Maior
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8202
Founded: Jun 16, 2014
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Salus Maior » Fri Sep 30, 2016 4:51 pm

Eh, continuing this from the previous thread.

ShinChonJi wrote:
When it says the word became flesh, does it mean literal flesh? When Jesus said, you must eat my flesh and drink my blood, did Jesus mean literal flesh and literal blood? In Revelation 7:14, the great multitude washed their robes white in the blood of the Lamb. Did they wash the robes in literal blood of lamb? Is it even literal robes? We have to think about these things.

Revelation 4 and 5 is where John got taken up to Heaven. There he saw someone sitting on a throne (Rev 4:2), which is God. In Rev 5:6-7, we see a Lamb come and take a scroll from the person sitting on the throne. The Lamb, who looked like it was slain, is Jesus of course. So if Jesus is God, did God just pass a scroll to himself?

Acts 7:56, when Stephen was stoned and saw Heaven, he literally said he sees the Son of Man standing on the right hand of God.

We have to understand what does Word mean. Does Word mean Jesus? If Word means Jesus, then you should be able to substitute "Jesus" in for whenever the word "Word" is used, and it will still make sense. Of course it doesn't. So what does Word mean?

Much like how reading the diary of Anne Frank lets you see someone's dreams, secrets, goals, mindset, etc. Seeing the diary of God, the Bible, lets us view his commands, wishes, will, goals, plan. But God doesn't have to write a Bible in order to have a plan. God has a plan first, and then he wrote the Bible later. God's plan for us existed in the beginning, so that means the Word was in the beginning.

The Word was God. It just means God's mindset is expressed through the Word, so whatever plan and Will we read from the Bible, is also the plan and Will of God, because the scripture is God breathed, and written by God himself. So I can say Anne's Diary IS Anne, because so much of Anne's will is captured in her diary.

He was with God in the beginning. Similar to how the Word was with God in the beginning, God already knew he had to sacrifice his Son to save man since the beginning of time, because God is all-knowing. So the "He" is the concept of the Son whom will be sacrificed.

Through him all things were made. Through Jesus, he was able to fulfill all of the prophecy written about him in the Old Testament, so Jesus made all those things happen, without leaving a single prophecy unfulfilled. And without Jesus nothing could have been made; the prophecies couldn't have been fulfilled.

Jesus was the light. The darkness was the Pharisees. They didn't understand that Jesus was the fulfillment of all the prophecies they so diligently study.

Word became flesh. Means the will and plan recorded in the Word became reality. The plan of Jesus coming finally happened after 600 years since the final prophecy was written about him in Malachi.

My explanation requires a lot of background study. If someone just gives the answer to a calculus question without showing how they got the answer, it's hard to accept easily if it's right or wrong. Moreover, it's hard to follow the steps of the calculus question if one doesn't know how to add or subtract. One needs to learn the basics of the Bible in order to understand more deeply.


Well, I've got a few issues with your thesis here.

1. The Bible was not written by God. It was written by the Apostles, the Prophets of the Old Testament, and Paul and those who worked with Paul.

2. When it was written "all Scripture is God-Breathed" (or God-Inspired in some versions), some of the books of the New Testament were not even written yet, and the Bible was most definitely not compiled yet. So the "scripture" mentioned might not even include the Gospels. Therefore, they were likely talking about Jewish scripture.

3. The verses I posted very clearly noted that 'the Word' mentioned by the Apostle John is in fact Jesus.

14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.[i]

Note that John notes that the 'Word" in the context of John 1 is 'he', and then proceeds to say that we have seen 'his' glory, the Son who came from the Father. Continued into 15-18...

15 (John testified concerning him. He cried out, saying, “This is the one I spoke about when I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’”) 16 Out of his fullness we have all received grace in place of grace already given. 17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and[b] is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.

In 18 it is again made clear as day, that the Son, Jesus, is himself God.

As for the revelation verse stating that God is basically handing the scroll to Himself, yes, He is.

The thing is we cannot fully comprehend God's nature. But we know that Jesus is the Son, and the Son is also God as revealed to us in this verse and others.

Maybe St. Patrick can explain it better: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQLfgaUoQCw
The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. John 1:5

"What is better? To be born good, or to overcome your evil nature through great effort?" -Paarthurnax

Corgis are funny. They have small legs.

User avatar
United Marxist Nations
Post Czar
 
Posts: 33837
Founded: Dec 02, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby United Marxist Nations » Fri Sep 30, 2016 4:55 pm

Serious question, should we change the poll to only include groups that accept the Trinity? There are some in it that don't, and the Trinity is such a core Christian doctrine that I am hesitant to call anyone who doesn't accept it a Christian, from a purely historical point of view.
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.

Eastern Orthodox Catechumen. Religious communitarian with Sorelian, Marxist, and Traditionalist influences. Sympathies toward Sunni Islam. All flags/avatars are chosen for aesthetic or humor purposes only
An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.

User avatar
Socialist Tera
Senator
 
Posts: 4929
Founded: Dec 23, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Socialist Tera » Fri Sep 30, 2016 4:56 pm

Just curious, what is the definition of heresy for you?
Nation's land: Indonesia, Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, most islands in the Paccific, Brunei, Phillipines, Thailand and Burma.
Remember, the Soviet Union beat back the Nazis. I voted for Forsen. Maoist punk, punk's not dead.
“I believe in only one thing,the power of human will.” ― Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin http://izquotes.com/quotes-pictures/quo ... 238938.jpg
Click here to join the discord revolution, no reactionaries or porkies allowed

User avatar
United Marxist Nations
Post Czar
 
Posts: 33837
Founded: Dec 02, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby United Marxist Nations » Fri Sep 30, 2016 4:58 pm

Socialist Tera wrote:Just curious, what is the definition of heresy for you?

Incorrect view.
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.

Eastern Orthodox Catechumen. Religious communitarian with Sorelian, Marxist, and Traditionalist influences. Sympathies toward Sunni Islam. All flags/avatars are chosen for aesthetic or humor purposes only
An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.

User avatar
Socialist Tera
Senator
 
Posts: 4929
Founded: Dec 23, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Socialist Tera » Fri Sep 30, 2016 4:59 pm

United Marxist Nations wrote:
Socialist Tera wrote:Just curious, what is the definition of heresy for you?

Incorrect view.

What made the iconoclasts wrong?
Nation's land: Indonesia, Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, most islands in the Paccific, Brunei, Phillipines, Thailand and Burma.
Remember, the Soviet Union beat back the Nazis. I voted for Forsen. Maoist punk, punk's not dead.
“I believe in only one thing,the power of human will.” ― Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin http://izquotes.com/quotes-pictures/quo ... 238938.jpg
Click here to join the discord revolution, no reactionaries or porkies allowed

User avatar
Salus Maior
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8202
Founded: Jun 16, 2014
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Salus Maior » Fri Sep 30, 2016 5:01 pm

Socialist Tera wrote:
United Marxist Nations wrote:Incorrect view.

What made the iconoclasts wrong?


They were destroying religious art out of fear of Muslims, when said art was considered fine by previous church councils.
The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. John 1:5

"What is better? To be born good, or to overcome your evil nature through great effort?" -Paarthurnax

Corgis are funny. They have small legs.

User avatar
United Marxist Nations
Post Czar
 
Posts: 33837
Founded: Dec 02, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby United Marxist Nations » Fri Sep 30, 2016 5:04 pm

Salus Maior wrote:
Socialist Tera wrote:What made the iconoclasts wrong?


They were destroying religious art out of fear of Muslims, when said art was considered fine by previous church councils.

^This
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.

Eastern Orthodox Catechumen. Religious communitarian with Sorelian, Marxist, and Traditionalist influences. Sympathies toward Sunni Islam. All flags/avatars are chosen for aesthetic or humor purposes only
An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.

User avatar
Soldati Senza Confini
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 82246
Founded: Mar 11, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Soldati Senza Confini » Fri Sep 30, 2016 5:11 pm

Socialist Tera wrote:Just curious, what is the definition of heresy for you?


Formal theological error, for the most part.

You can be theologically wrong on many points out of ignorance, and that's not necessarily heresy.

However, once you know what the church teaches and you find it wrong, you enter heretical ground.
Soldati senza confini: Better than an iPod in shuffle more with 20,000 songs.
Tekania wrote:Welcome to NSG, where informed opinions get to bump-heads with ignorant ideology under the pretense of an equal footing.

"When it’s a choice of putting food on the table, or thinking about your morals, it’s easier to say you’d think about your morals, but only if you’ve never faced that decision." - Anastasia Richardson

Current Goal: Flesh out nation factbook.

User avatar
Nordengrund
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7017
Founded: Jun 20, 2012
Anarchy

Postby Nordengrund » Fri Sep 30, 2016 5:11 pm

Socialist Tera wrote:
United Marxist Nations wrote:Incorrect view.

What made the iconoclasts wrong?


I don't see it as heresy, mainly because I come from a low-church evangelical background, so I'm used to unadorned churches.

Heresy is too strong of a word as it entails more than just an incorrect belief. Heresy is a belief that damns you to hell, like Gnosticism which denied the physical incarnation of Jesus. Or the Judaizers with their laws based salvation. Heresy either denies or downplays the divinity of Christ, or distorts the Gospel in some way. When you call something heresy, you are making a very serious charge. It isn't a word to be thrown around lightly.

Iconoclasm isn't really a heresy, but more of an overreaction where some Protestants wanted to distance themselves from the veneration of icons and believed all icons to be sinful, primarily based on the 10 Commandments. I don't see how iconoclasm distorts the Gospel or compromises Christ's divinity. I doubt it will jeopardize your salvation as I don't think Jesus will say "Depart from me since you refuse to have icons in your church/since you have icons in your church."

I'm not an iconoclast. I don't see icons as strictly necessary, but there's nothing wrong with having them.
Last edited by Nordengrund on Fri Sep 30, 2016 5:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Soldati Senza Confini
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 82246
Founded: Mar 11, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Soldati Senza Confini » Fri Sep 30, 2016 5:19 pm

Nordengrund wrote:
Socialist Tera wrote:What made the iconoclasts wrong?


I don't see it as heresy, mainly because I come from a low-church evangelical background, so I'm used to unadorned churches.

Heresy is too strong of a word as it entails more than just an incorrect belief. Heresy is a belief that damns you to hell, like Gnosticism which denied the physical incarnation of Jesus. Or the Judaizers with their laws based salvation. Heresy either denies or downplays the divinity of Christ, or distorts the Gospel in some way. When you call something heresy, you are making a very serious charge. It isn't a word to be thrown around lightly.

Iconoclasm isn't really a heresy, but more of an overreaction where some Protestants wanted to distance themselves from the veneration of icons and believed all icons to be sinful, primarily based on the 10 Commandments. I don't see how iconoclasm distorts the Gospel or compromises Christ's divinity. I doubt it will jeopardize your salvation as I don't think Jesus will say "Depart from me since you refuse to have icons in your church/since you have icons in your church."

I'm not an iconoclast. I don't see icons as strictly necessary, but there's nothing wrong with having them.


The problem with that definition is that it ignores the many heresies the church has declared as such for many reasons, such as the Spiritual Franciscans.
Soldati senza confini: Better than an iPod in shuffle more with 20,000 songs.
Tekania wrote:Welcome to NSG, where informed opinions get to bump-heads with ignorant ideology under the pretense of an equal footing.

"When it’s a choice of putting food on the table, or thinking about your morals, it’s easier to say you’d think about your morals, but only if you’ve never faced that decision." - Anastasia Richardson

Current Goal: Flesh out nation factbook.

User avatar
Nordengrund
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7017
Founded: Jun 20, 2012
Anarchy

Postby Nordengrund » Fri Sep 30, 2016 5:27 pm

Soldati Senza Confini wrote:
Nordengrund wrote:
I don't see it as heresy, mainly because I come from a low-church evangelical background, so I'm used to unadorned churches.

Heresy is too strong of a word as it entails more than just an incorrect belief. Heresy is a belief that damns you to hell, like Gnosticism which denied the physical incarnation of Jesus. Or the Judaizers with their laws based salvation. Heresy either denies or downplays the divinity of Christ, or distorts the Gospel in some way. When you call something heresy, you are making a very serious charge. It isn't a word to be thrown around lightly.

Iconoclasm isn't really a heresy, but more of an overreaction where some Protestants wanted to distance themselves from the veneration of icons and believed all icons to be sinful, primarily based on the 10 Commandments. I don't see how iconoclasm distorts the Gospel or compromises Christ's divinity. I doubt it will jeopardize your salvation as I don't think Jesus will say "Depart from me since you refuse to have icons in your church/since you have icons in your church."

I'm not an iconoclast. I don't see icons as strictly necessary, but there's nothing wrong with having them.


The problem with that definition is that it ignores the many heresies the church has declared as such for many reasons, such as the Spiritual Franciscans.


I don't really see how they were heretics. It looks like the embraced poverty and asceticism and the problems with the church hierarchy then. The RCC was criticized by various sects even before the Reformation with the Waldensians (IIRC correctly began in the 12th century) It also looks like voluntary poverty and asceticism would be something to commend as it shows such people aren't materialistic or overly attached to physical things.

Now if the Spiritual Franciscans taught poverty as a requirement for being a true Christian, then I can see how that is heretical.

User avatar
Tarsonis Survivors
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15674
Founded: Feb 03, 2009
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Tarsonis Survivors » Fri Sep 30, 2016 5:32 pm

United Marxist Nations wrote:Serious question, should we change the poll to only include groups that accept the Trinity? There are some in it that don't, and the Trinity is such a core Christian doctrine that I am hesitant to call anyone who doesn't accept it a Christian, from a purely historical point of view.

From an insiders standpoint sure, but from an academic perspective that wouldn't be the case. And since the site, at least in theory, tries to remain objective, they remain on the poll


Edit: unless papa Arch storms in, belt in hand and tells us we're all wrong.
Last edited by Tarsonis Survivors on Fri Sep 30, 2016 5:35 pm, 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
Jamzmania
Senator
 
Posts: 4864
Founded: Dec 01, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Jamzmania » Fri Sep 30, 2016 5:34 pm

I generally don't use the term heresy or heretic when describing another person or their beliefs, primarily due to its historical and other connotations.
The Alexanderians wrote:"Fear no man or woman,
No matter what their size.
Call upon me,
And I will equalize."

-Engraved on the side of my M1911 .45

User avatar
Tarsonis Survivors
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15674
Founded: Feb 03, 2009
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Tarsonis Survivors » Fri Sep 30, 2016 5:38 pm

An extensive list of Christian heresies, their beliefs and refutations can be found here


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of ... n_heresies
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
Nordengrund
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7017
Founded: Jun 20, 2012
Anarchy

Postby Nordengrund » Fri Sep 30, 2016 5:43 pm

Jamzmania wrote:I generally don't use the term heresy or heretic when describing another person or their beliefs, primarily due to its historical and other connotations.


Same.

I apply the Romans 14 approach where I won't judge another Christian about his beliefs as long as it doesn't compromise the Gospel of the doctrine of the Trinity. By labeling anything and everything we disagree with as heresy, we end up creating unnecessary division. Heresy tends to be the result of being too diverse to the point of sacrificing sound doctrine to try to appeal to as many people as possible, or being too dogmatic on non-essential issues to the point of being legalistic.

User avatar
Diopolis
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9497
Founded: May 15, 2012
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Diopolis » Fri Sep 30, 2016 5:46 pm

Socialist Tera wrote:Just curious, what is the definition of heresy for you?

Heresy is obstinate denial of theological truths after they have been dogmatically defined by the church and the individual has been corrected by the requisite authority. The latter part is important.
Call me Dio.
Thoughts
Abortion is not healthcare.
Amend the constitution to replace all elected positions with prison labor, I say.

User avatar
Socialist Tera
Senator
 
Posts: 4929
Founded: Dec 23, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Socialist Tera » Fri Sep 30, 2016 5:47 pm

Nordengrund wrote:
Jamzmania wrote:I generally don't use the term heresy or heretic when describing another person or their beliefs, primarily due to its historical and other connotations.


Same.

I apply the Romans 14 approach where I won't judge another Christian about his beliefs as long as it doesn't compromise the Gospel of the doctrine of the Trinity. By labeling anything and everything we disagree with as heresy, we end up creating unnecessary division. Heresy tends to be the result of being too diverse to the point of sacrificing sound doctrine to try to appeal to as many people as possible, or being too dogmatic on non-essential issues to the point of being legalistic.

Are cathars Christians in your eyes?
Nation's land: Indonesia, Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, most islands in the Paccific, Brunei, Phillipines, Thailand and Burma.
Remember, the Soviet Union beat back the Nazis. I voted for Forsen. Maoist punk, punk's not dead.
“I believe in only one thing,the power of human will.” ― Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin http://izquotes.com/quotes-pictures/quo ... 238938.jpg
Click here to join the discord revolution, no reactionaries or porkies allowed

User avatar
Nordengrund
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7017
Founded: Jun 20, 2012
Anarchy

Postby Nordengrund » Fri Sep 30, 2016 5:50 pm

Socialist Tera wrote:
Nordengrund wrote:
Same.

I apply the Romans 14 approach where I won't judge another Christian about his beliefs as long as it doesn't compromise the Gospel of the doctrine of the Trinity. By labeling anything and everything we disagree with as heresy, we end up creating unnecessary division. Heresy tends to be the result of being too diverse to the point of sacrificing sound doctrine to try to appeal to as many people as possible, or being too dogmatic on non-essential issues to the point of being legalistic.

Are cathars Christians in your eyes?


Idk much about it. They don't seem like it they have some Gnostic teachings and some Marcion influences.

User avatar
-Fahrong-
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1846
Founded: Jul 21, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby -Fahrong- » Fri Sep 30, 2016 5:59 pm

That new thread smell.
Formerly Atelia, born on the 7th of December 2011. Had 6001 controversial posts.
English is my third language, so sorry if I make mistakes

Evangelos Vasiliadis the Orthodox Christian Russian Pontic Greek cyber-commando.
Agrarian Corporatist, Reactionary Monarchist, Perennial Traditionalist, Moralist, Eurasianist, Byzantinist.
With a tinge of Autarkism, Mysticism, Theocratism, Stoicism and Militarism.

User avatar
Salus Maior
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8202
Founded: Jun 16, 2014
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Salus Maior » Fri Sep 30, 2016 6:00 pm

Tarsonis Survivors wrote:An extensive list of Christian heresies, their beliefs and refutations can be found here


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of ... n_heresies


Triclavianism seems rather...Unimportant and nit-picky?

What does it matter how many nails were used in Jesus's crucifixion?
The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. John 1:5

"What is better? To be born good, or to overcome your evil nature through great effort?" -Paarthurnax

Corgis are funny. They have small legs.

User avatar
-Fahrong-
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1846
Founded: Jul 21, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby -Fahrong- » Fri Sep 30, 2016 6:02 pm

United Marxist Nations wrote:Serious question, should we change the poll to only include groups that accept the Trinity? There are some in it that don't, and the Trinity is such a core Christian doctrine that I am hesitant to call anyone who doesn't accept it a Christian, from a purely historical point of view.

Glares over at JW's.
Formerly Atelia, born on the 7th of December 2011. Had 6001 controversial posts.
English is my third language, so sorry if I make mistakes

Evangelos Vasiliadis the Orthodox Christian Russian Pontic Greek cyber-commando.
Agrarian Corporatist, Reactionary Monarchist, Perennial Traditionalist, Moralist, Eurasianist, Byzantinist.
With a tinge of Autarkism, Mysticism, Theocratism, Stoicism and Militarism.

User avatar
Salus Maior
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8202
Founded: Jun 16, 2014
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Salus Maior » Fri Sep 30, 2016 6:02 pm

Socialist Tera wrote:Are cathars Christians in your eyes?


Not really, no.

Their Theology really doesn't make any sort of sense in the context of scripture and tradition. It just doesn't fit.

That being said, that doesn't mean they deserved to be slaughtered as they did in the Albigensian Crusade. Although it should be noted that they started the bloodshed by first murdering a Catholic clergyman (I forget what level clergy he was, he might have either been a Bishop or a Cardinal?).
Last edited by Salus Maior on Fri Sep 30, 2016 6:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. John 1:5

"What is better? To be born good, or to overcome your evil nature through great effort?" -Paarthurnax

Corgis are funny. They have small legs.

User avatar
Socialist Tera
Senator
 
Posts: 4929
Founded: Dec 23, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Socialist Tera » Fri Sep 30, 2016 6:06 pm

Salus Maior wrote:
Socialist Tera wrote:Are cathars Christians in your eyes?


Not really, no.

Their Theology really doesn't make any sort of sense in the context of scripture and tradition. It just doesn't fit.

That being said, that doesn't mean they deserved to be slaughtered as they did in the Albigensian Crusade. Although it should be noted that they started the bloodshed by first murdering a Catholic clergyman (I forget what level clergy he was, he might have either been a Bishop or a Cardinal?).

Do you think they could of spread and become a threat to catholics?
Nation's land: Indonesia, Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, most islands in the Paccific, Brunei, Phillipines, Thailand and Burma.
Remember, the Soviet Union beat back the Nazis. I voted for Forsen. Maoist punk, punk's not dead.
“I believe in only one thing,the power of human will.” ― Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin http://izquotes.com/quotes-pictures/quo ... 238938.jpg
Click here to join the discord revolution, no reactionaries or porkies allowed

User avatar
Athartha
Diplomat
 
Posts: 973
Founded: Jun 05, 2011
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Athartha » Fri Sep 30, 2016 6:19 pm

Salus Maior wrote:
Socialist Tera wrote:Are cathars Christians in your eyes?


Not really, no.

Their Theology really doesn't make any sort of sense in the context of scripture and tradition. It just doesn't fit.

That being said, that doesn't mean they deserved to be slaughtered as they did in the Albigensian Crusade. Although it should be noted that they started the bloodshed by first murdering a Catholic clergyman (I forget what level clergy he was, he might have either been a Bishop or a Cardinal?).

Blessed Pierre de Castelnau was an Archdeacon and Papal Legate. He later became a Cisterician Monk and first inquisitor of Viviers and Montpellier. His death lead to the Albigensian Crusade.
Pro dolorosa Eius passione, miserere nobis et totius mundi


Ordained Catholic Priest

Next

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Cannot think of a name, Grinning Dragon, Holy Tedalonia, Ifreann, Kernen, Petrolheadia, Poland-and-Lithuania, Ramune and Chocolate, Redsection, The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp, The Mask Empire, The Parkus Empire, Tysoania, Yahoo [Bot]

Remove ads