First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next  Last
Christianity
2319 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / where the grass i...
Offline
Posted 12/26/11
1. Christian sects are many but there can only be one true church, one right doctrine, one right authority. What is/are these church, these are the "Apostolic Churches" (the churches that has a continuous line up to the first disciples of Jesus Christ). Anything else besides the "Apostolic Churches" are excess.

2. Christians, at least those who knows what it is really all about, doesn't have this superiority complex. All of us came from humble origins. Most of us, Christians, are those who did bad things in their past. That is why we cannot brag that we are better than anyone else.

For those who were born to be Christians, they are yet to undergo this process.

3. Christians tries to convert or share their religious belief to other people because we found peace and a sense of redemption with our religion. Our way of living became better when we change according to Christian living. Like before, when someone hits me, all hell turns loose and the cycle of violence begins and never stops but with Christianity, i live in peace now breaking violence with forgiveness.

We share not only our religious belief but also our happiness.

anyway, that is about us. Most people stereotype us as Jesus Freaks or something.
Posted 12/26/11
People act as if the Inquisition is still going. In truth, not even close. There are extremist Christian sects, but they can do little more than poison the minds of children and anyone else stupid enough to follow their examples.
2106 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Guess
Offline
Posted 12/26/11 , edited 12/26/11

alupihan45 wrote:

1. Christian sects are many but there can only be one true church, one right doctrine, one right authority. What is/are these church, these are the "Apostolic Churches" (the churches that has a continuous line up to the first disciples of Jesus Christ). Anything else besides the "Apostolic Churches" are excess.


So, you are saying that there must be one True Church, and thus, only that 'Apostolic Church' is the true one. How, pray, do you determine which one is true and which one is false? There has to be some parameter, otherwise, you can just say that this one is true because you happen to believe that one fit the words of the Bible, something relative, and is taught, rather than something that is universally true, and objective. That is the reason for the split in the first place, difference in opinions of interpretation. Let's continue with this line of thought, how can we say that every current interpretation is wrong, and the true interpretation by which a Church can be founded is lost? Unless there is some parameter beside Personal Interpretation, there is nothing, thus, you must set a more reasonable parameter of Truth of any faith.


alupihan45
2. Christians, at least those who knows what it is really all about, doesn't have this superiority complex. All of us came from humble origins. Most of us, Christians, are those who did bad things in their past. That is why we cannot brag that we are better than anyone else.
For those who were born to be Christians, they are yet to undergo this process.


Yet, doesn't the idea of being a Christian, that is, part of the 'True Religion', entail some idea of being 'superior' to the 'Pagans', in that it is embodied in the idea of being a Christain, being part of the true Religion, which makes a Christian closer to truth than the Pagans, who are further from truth by virtue of their faith. Thus, the superiority derives from the idea of the superiority of the Church, which Christians must take to faith as 'True', while all other ideas contrary to faith as 'False', which means that the individual worshipper, 'umble as he may be, and very umble indeed, gets a sense of superiority by virtue of the fact that he posesses truth, where other religionists do not possess truth, thus superior in that respect.


alupihan45
3. Christians tries to convert or share their religious belief to other people because we found peace and a sense of redemption with our religion. Our way of living became better when we change according to Christian living. Like before, when someone hits me, all hell turns loose and the cycle of violence begins and never stops but with Christianity, i live in peace now breaking violence with forgiveness.

We share not only our religious belief but also our happiness.

anyway, that is about us. Most people stereotype us as Jesus Freaks or something.


But, you supporting the moral values of Christianity, which is seperate from the actual faith itself, for example, we can take God out of most of the Ten Commandment, such as, do not steal, do not murder, do not envy your neighbour, etc. And we may promote this amongst most people, without promoting the Jewish or the Christian faith, but, given that, if we believe in a faith simply for its moral value, and we convert to convince more people to that moral system, why believe in the God part, and keep the moral values, as well as absorb all other moral values. Let us consider this from another perspective, you mention the Christianity is great for you, you get a sense of peace, etc. Yet, based upon this personal experience, how does it follow that what is best for you, what applies to you, applies to all?
2319 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / where the grass i...
Offline
Posted 12/27/11

longfenglim wrote:




So, you are saying that there must be one True Church, and thus, only that 'Apostolic Church' is the true one. How, pray, do you determine which one is true and which one is false? There has to be some parameter, otherwise, you can just say that this one is true because you happen to believe that one fit the words of the Bible, something relative, and is taught, rather than something that is universally true, and objective. That is the reason for the split in the first place, difference in opinions of interpretation. Let's continue with this line of thought, how can we say that every current interpretation is wrong, and the true interpretation by which a Church can be founded is lost? Unless there is some parameter beside Personal Interpretation, there is nothing, thus, you must set a more reasonable parameter of Truth of any faith.


Yes there is a parameter. Check their Apostolic succession of leaders. Like the Catholics. You will see that the present pope has a continuous line of succession that can trace back up to St. Peter. That is the real measurement how real a christian church is. What Jesus taught, he taught to the first disciples and this disciples taught it to their successors. Whatever goes more or less or against the teachings that was passed on are "excess". I can say that Jesus and God are one because there are some text that somehow supports it but thi
Posted 12/27/11 , edited 12/27/11
I consider myself a religious person( go to church 2 times a week and on holidays), but I am not a "Jesus Freak".

Its always nice to see someone that finds a religion and something they can believe in, but I cannot cosign individuals that try to push religion on people. I don't think you can force faith. Extremist in most things, not just religion, give off bad perceptions.

I also don't believe in a "superior" religion.
2106 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Guess
Offline
Posted 12/27/11 , edited 12/27/11

alupihan45 wrote:


longfenglim wrote:




So, you are saying that there must be one True Church, and thus, only that 'Apostolic Church' is the true one. How, pray, do you determine which one is true and which one is false? There has to be some parameter, otherwise, you can just say that this one is true because you happen to believe that one fit the words of the Bible, something relative, and is taught, rather than something that is universally true, and objective. That is the reason for the split in the first place, difference in opinions of interpretation. Let's continue with this line of thought, how can we say that every current interpretation is wrong, and the true interpretation by which a Church can be founded is lost? Unless there is some parameter beside Personal Interpretation, there is nothing, thus, you must set a more reasonable parameter of Truth of any faith.


Yes there is a parameter. Check their Apostolic succession of leaders. Like the Catholics. You will see that the present pope has a continuous line of succession that can trace back up to St. Peter. That is the real measurement how real a christian church is. What Jesus taught, he taught to the first disciples and this disciples taught it to their successors. Whatever goes more or less or against the teachings that was passed on are "excess". I can say that Jesus and God are one because there are some text that somehow supports it but thi


This is incomplete, please rewrite your reply that I may respond to it.
16 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / North Hollywood
Offline
Posted 12/28/11
What always bothered me about Christianity/Christians is their ability to disown anyone who carries their label and isn't perfect. Isn't the only requirement of being a Christian that you believe that Jesus Christ was the divine son of God and died for your sins?
55061 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
52 / F / Atlanta GA
Online
Posted 12/28/11
I am an atheist but I recognize that most people need to believe in a higher power so I leave at that. I do laugh when they say I well receive blessing for my helping people.
709 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / Wishing for Jeju...
Offline
Posted 12/29/11
Do you believe in natural consequences, Tarakelly? We really do reap what we sow! Some people call it karma, but the Bible is filled with examples of natural consequences as well.
4951 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / France
Offline
Posted 12/29/11
Are we talking about the same Christianity that the church sells to people, or the Christ consciousness and people who follow Jesus's footsteps and wisdom?
2106 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Guess
Offline
Posted 12/29/11

Titus2woman wrote:

Do you believe in natural consequences, Tarakelly? We really do reap what we sow! Some people call it karma, but the Bible is filled with examples of natural consequences as well. :)


You have a misunderstanding of the concept of Karma- Karmic retribution does not occur within life, a man may be evil, detestable, and may get away with it in the end with no consequence, what so ever- I can think of Pol Pot as an example- but, the consequence occurs after death. We accumulate it in life, and are punished for it after death through the process of reincarnation.
709 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / Wishing for Jeju...
Offline
Posted 12/29/11 , edited 12/29/11
*THANK YOU!*, longfenglim~you are correct! I did NOT have a grasp of the understanding of karma. You set me straight!
Posted 12/29/11

Titus2woman wrote:

Do you believe in natural consequences, Tarakelly? We really do reap what we sow! Some people call it karma, but the Bible is filled with examples of natural consequences as well. :)

Titus2woman wrote:

*THANK YOU!*, longfenglim~you are correct! I did NOT have a grasp of the understanding of karma. You set me straight! :D
What you did grossly ignored is the fundamental differences within the two belief systems: the Christian faith is eternal damnation after death, whereas the Hindu faith is rebirth as a lower caste after reincarnation.

However, none of those are "natural consequences". As in cause and effect that's observable within the natural world, thus is justifiable through natural means.

If anything, a real case study of how karma works is the natural science of fetal origin. With mounting evidences strongly indicate how human learning and socializing processes begins before birth, through their immediate hosts' physical, social, and cultural environments.

Annie Murphy Paul: What we learn before we're born
Pop quiz: When does learning begin? Answer: Before we are born. Science writer Annie Murphy Paul talks through new research that shows how much we learn in the womb -- from the lilt of our native language to our soon-to-be-favorite foods.
2319 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / where the grass i...
Offline
Posted 12/30/11

longfenglim wrote:


sorry about the previous post. Don't know what happened.

you said: So, you are saying that there must be one True Church, and thus, only that 'Apostolic Church' is the true one. How, pray, do you determine which one is true and which one is false? There has to be some parameter, otherwise, you can just say that this one is true because you happen to believe that one fit the words of the Bible, something relative, and is taught, rather than something that is universally true, and objective. That is the reason for the split in the first place, difference in opinions of interpretation. Let's continue with this line of thought, how can we say that every current interpretation is wrong, and the true interpretation by which a Church can be founded is lost? Unless there is some parameter beside Personal Interpretation, there is nothing, thus, you must set a more reasonable parameter of Truth of any faith.

Yes there is a parameter. Check their Apostolic succession of leaders. Like the Catholics. You will see that the present pope has a continuous line of succession that can trace back up to St. Peter. That is the real measurement how real a christian church is. What Jesus taught, he taught to the first disciples and this disciples taught it to their successors. Whatever goes more or less or against the teachings that was passed on are "excess". I can say that Jesus and God are one person because others say there are some text that somehow supports it (by their own interpretation of the bible) but this is rejected by the Catholics, who are the one who composed and compiled the Bible. So who will you believe? Me, who interpreted the Bible or the Church that was authorized by God to preach?


you said: Yet, doesn't the idea of being a Christian, that is, part of the 'True Religion', entail some idea of being 'superior' to the 'Pagans', in that it is embodied in the idea of being a Christain, being part of the true Religion, which makes a Christian closer to truth than the Pagans, who are further from truth by virtue of their faith. Thus, the superiority derives from the idea of the superiority of the Church, which Christians must take to faith as 'True', while all other ideas contrary to faith as 'False', which means that the individual worshipper, 'umble as he may be, and very umble indeed, gets a sense of superiority by virtue of the fact that he posesses truth, where other religionists do not possess truth, thus superior in that respect.

well, what we believe as truth, we usually claim it to be "better than the other" that is why we believe in it. example, you embrace democracy because you think/know that this is better than the other while the others embraced communism because they think it is better. This, you cannot attribute only to Christianity. It applies to all belief system, ideologies, philosophy and religion. I, myself, will not stick into a belief which I think inferior.

bottomline, don't accuse us, Christians, only- accuse every people who have a belief.

you said: But, you supporting the moral values of Christianity, which is seperate from the actual faith itself, for example, we can take God out of most of the Ten Commandment, such as, do not steal, do not murder, do not envy your neighbour, etc. And we may promote this amongst most people, without promoting the Jewish or the Christian faith, but, given that, if we believe in a faith simply for its moral value, and we convert to convince more people to that moral system, why believe in the God part, and keep the moral values, as well as absorb all other moral values. Let us consider this from another perspective, you mention the Christianity is great for you, you get a sense of peace, etc. Yet, based upon this personal experience, how does it follow that what is best for you, what applies to you, applies to all?

Religion without god (or a god) is not a religion at all. Religion is not a mere moral code or philosophy. It comes with theology also. I wasn't a Christian because of it's moral code ONLY. I am a Christian because I love God and Jesus. If you love moral code, might as well be another religion-cult, pagan or mainstream.

Same with Islam, if you don't believe in Mohammed and Allah, might as well not be a muslim. In Buddhism, if you don't believe in Buddha, might as well not be a buddhist. If you don't believe in the deities of Hindu, don't be a hindu.

I just practice the moral codes of Christianity because I believe in God and Jesus.

And this is the important part, what is best for me is indeed doesn't apply to others also. If by killing, you find a sense of peace, Christianity isn't for you. If you find happiness in fornication, adultery and other sexually immoral act, Christianity isn't for you. Even in our scriptures, it is said that not all will listen. Not all will obey. Not all will bow down to God.
2319 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / where the grass i...
Offline
Posted 12/30/11

DeusExMachina wrote:

What always bothered me about Christianity/Christians is their ability to disown anyone who carries their label and isn't perfect. Isn't the only requirement of being a Christian that you believe that Jesus Christ was the divine son of God and died for your sins?


well, you have to follow the instruction of Jesus if you truly believe. I may say I love my parents but if i don't obey them, i think it is fair that to say that i don't love them all.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.