Just out of Curiosity!!!!

lunamoth said:
"The Protestants emphasized such concepts as salvation by "faith alone" (not faith and good works or infused righteousness), "Scripture alone" (the Bible as the sole rule of faith, rather than the Bible plus Tradition), "the priesthood of all believers" (eschewing the special authority and power of the Roman Catholic sacramental priesthood), that all people are individually responsible for their status before God such that talk of mediation through any but Christ alone is unbiblical. Because they saw these teachings as stemming from the Bible, they encouraged publication of the Bible in the common language and universal education."

(Religious Influences for the Reformation, on wiki)

The above seem like quite a lot of changes to adapt to personal feelings and opinion, yet we decided to keep the name Christianity. :)

2 c,
lunamoth
Click to expand...

hey Luna, why do you try to attach protestant & all christian beliefs to catholicsim? as if they came out of some mother church. you know i do not think that is correct. most of these demoninations & their thoughts today can be traced back to the first two centuries under a different title including gnosticism, (i do not feel like putting up the list) that is before Rome started to kill everyone that did not agree with Nicene Only & tell people there babies burn in hell if they are not baptized & add them to the roster. if you are not baptized catholic & say Hail Mary for your sins then you go to hell. the above seems like an awful lot of unbiblical changes to keep the title Christianity.
now that is real Christian tradition.

there are so many traditions that they do not even exist in the bible from Jesus...so i wonder who conjured all that up. so if you are trying to claim you are first & everyone else is second to you, that is not right. that view alone kills.
the gnostics were actually first because the whole thought pattern existed before Jesus came. & the jews were before that.

so when you speak of reform, there really was no reform at all. rather freedom from the catholics for ALL religions to come back to what there was originally - namely Jesus & the Apostles & many sects that existed long before 1600...

sometimes i feel like you harbor ill towards those who still REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY believe in the bible for all guidance.
you can have the title because i dont really want it. Gnostics have always posted here so they can have the title too & who cares? it is an interfaith board.

2 c
 
Dor said:
This is really not to start a fight it is just a question I have been wondering....

Just how far can you change a religion to fit ones opinions and feelings before you have to change the name of it??:confused:
Click to expand...
Yall are flyin on this one! And I guess like humor it all depends on the individual or the organization...to determine what is funny and what isn't...to determine how far the line goes...

There are those that will draw the line at bible inerrancy...100% accurate...don't question or discuss it...

For me, and we are talking Christianity, not just any religion...to me, my current line if I didn't believe in the essence of the teachings of our elder brother and wayshower...if I don't believe that I too can achieve...if I can't attempt to forgive and love my enemy...if I can't try to take the log out of my eye...than why would I consider myself a Christian?

Now is it for me to judge who is and who isn't a christian...I suppose I could decide to and be judged similarily...

If you can't see G-d in the person next to you...quit looking -Ghandi
 
Bandit said:
sometimes i feel like you harbor ill towards those who still REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY believe in the bible for all guidance.
you can have the title because i dont really want it. Gnostics have always posted here so they can have the title too & who cares? it is an interfaith board.

2 c
Click to expand...

Gentle Bandit, I'll refer you to my reply to Dor concerning the objective of my post. It was not an attack on Protestantism, nor on Fundamentalism, nor was it an attack on anything. It was a reflection on the changing meanings of Christianity as requested in the OP by Dor. I harbor no ill will toward you or anyone here. But, it is evident from your responses to me that you are threatened by me. And that makes me sad, and it is what I am talking about in the other thread when I say that it's difficult to converse here without offending or being accused of attacking Christian principles. I've come to expect that if I ever say anything that 1) does not reflect a literal-factual interpretation of the Bible or 2) pays reverence to Catholic or Orthodox Tradition I will get in return a post of indignation and quite possibly insults from you. Just as the above illustrates.

What can I say Bandit but I am saddened by this. I know you have respect for others, and I've always believed you have respect for me. Why don't you trust that I have respect for you, even when I might post something that you don't agree with? It is not meant to be an attack on you, or the Bible, or anything you hold dear.

I would enjoy discussing the above topic with you if we can refrain from insults and indignation. I bet we have a lot more in common than you are thinking at the moment. Thomas has started a thread on Tradition. That might be a good place to start.

Peace,
lunamoth
 
lunamoth said:
What can I say Bandit but I am saddened by this. I know you have respect for others, and I've always believed you have respect for me. Why don't you trust that I have respect for you, even when I might post something that you don't agree with? It is not meant to be an attack on you, or the Bible, or anything you hold dear.

I would enjoy discussing the above topic with you if we can refrain from insults and indignation. I bet we have a lot more in common than you are thinking at the moment. Thomas has started a thread on Tradition. That might be a good place to start.

Peace,
lunamoth
Click to expand...

it is NOT an insult nor meant as one & i am not taking the guilt this time. i am not interested in the traditions of men.

i know we have a lot in common & that is what i would rather focus on. Peace to you Luna & love in Christ.
have a very nice weekend:)
 
Bandit said:
i think this is more like the /buddha/new age/muslim/hindu/ Christian Forum.
Click to expand...
OK Bandit, 1 order of hindu-christianity coming up;)

www.bedegriffiths.com/newsletters.html

seriously, Bede Griffiths, a Cathloic monk was a remarkable man who lived and worked in India for many decades, allowing its Hindu practitioners to fertilize his imagination.

Elsewhere here in a thread I started on religious pluralism a while ago I quoted Panikkar a Catholic theologian's use of the metaphor of the Divine being filtered through human experience resulting in a "prism" effect whereby the "white light" of divine truth is refracted into an entire spectrum of divine/religious experience. there have been discussions here in recent time re the "walled garden" approach to subforums, It is a difficult balancing act. For folks that just want to discuss their "blue" religion, they don't want to hear "green," "yellow," or "red" ideas. I Brian raised a good point elsewhere re the question of when-to use my metaphor here-does "blue" so change color that it is no longer recognizable as "blue?" But as the color spectrum shades incrementally into the different hues-blue-violet, yellow-green, etc. have to ask ourselves as re whether it makes any kind of sense to attempt to make dialogues "true-blue." I'm a poor beginning landscape painter and, while monochromatic paintings-i.e., those where the picture is just variations on a single color-can be attractive, I prefer pictures whereby there is a predominating color but with complementary ones thrown in.:p have a good one, earl
 
earl said:
OK Bandit, 1 order of hindu-christianity coming up;)

www.bedegriffiths.com/newsletters.html

seriously, Bede Griffiths, a Cathloic monk was a remarkable man who lived and worked in India for many decades, allowing its Hindu practitioners to fertilize his imagination.

I prefer pictures whereby there is a predominating color but with complementary ones thrown in.:p have a good one, earl
Click to expand...

i do not believe in all pluralism & imagination. i do not see this as a walled garden like the other forums. it is more like a 12 lane highway for every belief on the market to drive a mack truck through & come through with massive bulldozers destroying the foundation & core of my faith. i think i will stick with generic.

you have a good one too!:)
 
To prove my point everyone go to Bandits public profile and find the topics started by him and go read his liberel vs literal posts on other boards and see how fast he gets shot down by the other religions when he say he wants to be for example a muslim but not believe 80% of their book or pray 5 times a day...check the hindu one and the Baha whatever one it is pretty funny and surprising just how fast he is told no you cant be insert name here if you do it.....but we are supposed to let people rip the heart out of Christianity and keep the name I dont think so...........and Im not talking about any stupid man made doctrines or traditions or little differences.....Im talking about the big thing people who want to take the Bible to the trash dump and say Jesus didnt die or was just some dude well no!
 
Dor said:
To prove my point everyone go to Bandits public profile and find the topics started by him and go read his liberel vs literal posts on other boards and see how fast he gets shot down by the other religions when he say he wants to be for example a muslim but not believe 80% of their book or pray 5 times a day...check the hindu one and the Baha whatever one it is pretty funny and surprising just how fast he is told no you cant be insert name here if you do it.....but we are supposed to let people rip the heart out of Christianity and keep the name I dont think so...........and Im not talking about any stupid man made doctrines or traditions or little differences.....Im talking about the big thing people who want to take the Bible to the trash dump and say Jesus didnt die or was just some dude well no!
Click to expand...
You are quite right Dor. Those threads were a very interesting exercise and I appreciate Bandit for starting them, and for everyone who kindly answered his questions. What struck me was how the members of those religions did not start an outcry and demand Bandit be banned for posing his questions.

lunamoth
 
Dor said:
I have never said anything about banning anything or anyone.
Click to expand...

You are right Dor, and I apologize for implying that. But there was not the general outcry and defensiveness shown to Bandit's threads as was shown toward the end of the non-theistic thead.

luna
 
I will point out that no one likes to be insulted, veiled or otherwise.

I will also point out that none of us has the total picture. In fact the ONLY commonality Christians have with eachother is this, we believe that Jesus is our savior, our redeemer and our messiah.

In fact that is the only thing that Christ says that matters.

Whether we consider God to be of three parts or one, whether we follow a mystical variant of the faith or a pragmatical one, whether we hold Mary in certain elevated esteem or not, is irrelevent to our salvation.

Jesus Himself made it quite clear, what ever we say or do or think of others, the exact same thing we are doing to Him...

If that is the case (and I fail to see the possibility of Jesus joking), then our goal should be, to be most excellent to each other, at all times, even in our disagreements.

I do not mind saying, that I am hurt by some of what has been said here as of late. I expected better from the exceedingly high calliber of members we have at this forum; especially the seasoned members.

I can't be any clearer on this issue.

that is all

your brother in Christ,

Q
 
No you must believe 100% of the Quran if you don't your Kafir.
Click to expand...
No
Click to expand...
no. not even 0.000000000000000.....1%.
Click to expand...
nope. Contradicts the Quran and Sunnah.
Click to expand...
Impossible. That negates the very testimony that makes one a muslim.
Click to expand...
To answer this question, lets me define what constitute a person to be a Muslim. These are mandatory for all Muslims to believe 100% and perform. Now that I have laid the basic foundation of Islam, you can then try to relate to what you have asked. For each question, try to refer to all the above points and see if it fits. If it doesn't then it is absolutely rejected.
Click to expand...
I would like to begin my answer to your questions in one word, the type of one word that Shoghi Effendi is known for in the Guardianship of the Writings:

No.
Click to expand...
My first impression is people can either accept the Baha'i Faith or not.
Click to expand...
I am somewhat compelled to ask why you would want to be a Hindu if you didn't believe in 80% of their scriptures?
Click to expand...


Ok they may not be "defensive" to some but they dang sure tell you nope cant do that:) .


Let me lay down the basic foundation of Christianity and Im a wacko Fundamentalist....and isnt that what we are talking about..I think most would agree the basic foundation of Christianity is Christ or did I miss something.
 
Dor said:
Ok they may not be "defensive" to some but they dang sure tell you nope cant do that:) .


Let me lay down the basic foundation of Christianity and Im a wacko Fundamentalist....and isnt that what we are talking about..I think most would agree the basic foundation of Christianity is Christ or did I miss something.
Click to expand...

Dor, I'm glad you did that compilation. Thank you. And you were completely right to post what you did in the non-theistic thread. In fact, that thread was a good mirror of Bandit's lib-lit threads right up until the end when it was suggested by Faithful that the thread was doomed to become an argument. It was not an argument up to that point, and that was why I replied to Faithful, at the risk of alienating her, which is something I really did not hope to do.

Also, Bandit's lib-lit threads did not spawn other threads in those other fora questioning what is the definition of Relgion X, Y or Z. Now, that's confidence. :)

Look, I think all of this is good to discuss, and I am really happy that it has in itself been a pretty civil discussion on its own. I do not want to alienate anyone here by what I say, so for now I guess I am done with this thread as well.

I really hope you, Faithful, Bandit, and everyone stay for robust discussion and loving Christian fellowship.

Peace,
luna
 
Last edited:
And Dor, I for one do not think you are a wacko Christian Fundamentalist! OK, you use the fundamentals as the foundation of your beliefs. I respect that, as I do your knowledge of the Bible and Christian history, and your not infrequent kindness. I hope I have never left you with the impression that I think you are a wacko.

lunamoth
 
You know Im really confused now....

Quahom1 said:
I will also point out that none of us has the total picture. In fact the ONLY commonality Christians have with eachother is this, we believe that Jesus is our savior, our redeemer and our messiah.
Click to expand...

And isnt that all that any of us got upset about. Sorry I wont bitch and moan about differences in doctrine or denominations(I might give my point of view and try to show it) but I dont usually get worked up over it.

Start posts about Christianity with the main topic a man that throws Christ is a trash can and Im not gonna sit there and say there is anything Christian about him. Just like the Judaism and Muslim posters wouldnt me if I went to those boards spouting off about Christ(or Id get told to back off) and said I was Jew or Muslim.....for example ask BB about Jews for Jesus!!!
 
Quahom1 said:
Jesus Himself made it quite clear, what ever we say or do or think of others, the exact same thing we are doing to Him...

If that is the case (and I fail to see the possibility of Jesus joking), then our goal should be, to be most excellent to each other, at all times, even in our disagreements.
Click to expand...
Q, the first statement here helps remind of the Standard. The second one brings to mind Bill & Ted, and while I am certainly being tongue & cheek, a moment's pondering reminds me that as those excellent dudes went about their adventure, gathering up So-crates, Frood, & such, they were positive and respectful about it (on the whole).

So, even with the humor, your point still resounds ... :)

Peace,

taijasi
 
Quahom1 said:
I will also point out that none of us has the total picture. In fact the ONLY commonality Christians have with eachother is this, we believe that Jesus is our savior, our redeemer and our messiah.


If that is the case (and I fail to see the possibility of Jesus joking), then our goal should be, to be most excellent to each other, at all times, even in our disagreements.
Click to expand...

Here, here!
 
As a bit of tangential aside to my post re Bede Griffiths-which to me might be more interesting than doctrinal combativeness:D -I got to thinking about the multi-page list of Catholic clerics I could come up with that have studied, practiced, or at least actively engaged in interrelgious dialogue. Yet, can think of few to no Protestant clerics that have done that. I find that very interesting-I'm no Catholic-raised a nominal (or was that heathenistic:p ) Protestant. But wonder what it is re Catholic clerics that makes them so apparently much more open to such dialogue than Protestant ones. Any ideas out there? Take care, earl
 
Jesus Himself made it quite clear, what ever we say or do or think of others, the exact same thing we are doing to Him...
Click to expand...
Mat 25:40And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, In as much as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

key word I see here is brethren doubt someone who discounts everything about Jesus would be considered his brethren and I could be wrong but Im still gonna call a spade a spade and a heart a heart.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top