Subject:
|
Re: Problems with Christianity
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 17 Dec 2000 07:26:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
535 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bill Farkas writes:
> > >
> > >
> > Minor point: Christmas is of Catholic origin, springing from Constantines
> > pronouncement of Rome as a Christian Empire. They kept their basics
> > practices and just changed the name plates on the base of their idols. In
> > the Pilgrim days Christmas and Catholicism were not permitted (because of
> > fleeing it's persecution).
>
> The Christmas that is celebrated today is bits and pieces of a variety of
> traditions and religions from all over the place. If you are refering to
> the name, yes, that comes from the Roman Catholic Christ Mass.
But I also hinted at the fact that Constantine kept the old practices under
new names, which was a round about way of saying what you said in the first
part of the above statement.
>
>
> > I do differentiate between Christian and Catholic
> > on the basis of the Popes recent statements that Mary is co-redemptress with
> > Christ and even more recent statement that believing in Christ is not
> > necessary as long as you're a decent person. The focus on Mary and the
> > sacraments is also antithetical to salvation by grace alone.
>
> I suppose Catholics also differentiate between Christianity and
> Protestantism for their reasons, too. I can't say I respect either opinion
> - cheap propaganda ("You're not *real* Christians, we are," shouted
> simultaneously).
I wasn't making any such statements, just pointing out the difference in
soteriology - which are significant.
>
> >
> > These remarks are not intended to criticize the sincerity of practicing
> > Catholics, merely to point out that there are fundamental differences in
> > matters of soteriology between Catholicism and Biblical Christianity.
>
> Ummmmm, Catholicism isn't a form of Biblical Christianity? Forgive me while
> I laugh at such nonsense.
Laugh away if it makes you feel enlightened.
The fact of the matter is it's not Biblical Christianity. The sacraments are
nowhere in the Bible (except of course baptism [not of babies] and
communion). Mary being a perpetual virgin is not in the Bible. Popery is not
in the Bible. A priesthood is not in the NT. Forbidding to marry and
abstaining from meats (on Fridays) is called doctrines of devils and lies of
seducing spirits. Purgatory is not in the Bible. Idles are forbidden in the
Bible. Salvation is said to be in Christ alone, not Mary - she herself said
she needed a Savior. The list goes on. They admit that they accept the
"traditions" of the church and the Pope as infallible. Why do you think they
caused the Dark Ages? Because they didn't want their people reading the
Bible. Which is why the Reformation happened in the first place. After the
Reformation they told their people if they read the Bible they would go
crazy. So, yes, I differentiate between Catholocism and "Biblical"
Christianity. And anyway, I presented it as "my" opinion. I didn't say
anyone else should share it, least of all you.
> Why don't you drop the spin-mastering and simply refer to what you term >as "Biblical Christianity" as Protestantism?
I would if I were a Protestant. I'm not. I also never said I wasn't
Catholic. I've never said anything about what I am. It doesn't matter what I
am. I wasn't talking about what I am. And I made no value judgements about
which one was superior. Different people like different flavors - to each
his own. Catholics may be right, who knows? My point wasn't about who's
right or wrong, merely to point out the difference in soteriology - which is
stark - and which is what I said in the first place!
Too many people here read too much into things. Just more knee-jerk
reactions. I prefer to be judged as an individual and not part of whatever
you wrongly consider "Christendom" to be. I have demonstrated many times
that most people's mis/preconceptions about Christians is based on their own
distorted views of what a Christian is. And I maintain again that if someone
is not living by the Book then they are not followers of It. I could list
oodles of verses that state as much. Again, it's the same as saying all
Muslims are terrorists. It's simply not true. True Christianity is that
which reaches out and helps the poor, the widows, the orphans, the
imprisoned, etc. It is not the stuff of the Inquisition or the Crusades
despite what those who participated in these acts said of themselves. Any
such act is in direct opposition to the doctrines of Christ and the Apostles
and is therefore not Christian by true definition.
I am more appauled than anyone here by the purported history of the Church.
It sickens me. I try to live as best I can by the precepts of the Bible, as
I understand them, to demonstrate what Christianity is supposed to be about:
compassion, benevolence, forgiveness, etc.
If I misrepresent atheism or agnosticism or any other position held by
anyone here on LUGnet, those people stand up and set the record straight.
I'm doing the same thing. I will not be misrepresented or mischaracterized.
I take my honor and integrity very seriously. I can accept any criticism
that is warranted - as Marines, our only reply to correction was, "No
excuse, Sir!" (which is why I hate whining - we didn't offer nor accept
excuses). I will not be criticized as something I'm not. If we disagree on
matters at face value, that's fine, I respect that, but your remarks are not
based on an accurate characterization of mine.
> God only knows where eastern orthodoxism lies in this hubris - I suppose they
> aren't real Christians because their cross is too short.
>
> -->Bruce<--
Respectfully,
Bill
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Problems with Christianity
|
| (...) I didn't say that you did - I was just pointing out the silliness of the whole situation. (...) A knowledge of history makes me feel enlightened. (...) I think you have an extremely narrow definition of "Biblical Christianity" not shared by (...) (24 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Problems with Christianity
|
| (...) The Christmas that is celebrated today is bits and pieces of a variety of traditions and religions from all over the place. If you are refering to the name, yes, that comes from the Roman Catholic Christ Mass. Various Christian sects have (...) (24 years ago, 16-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
298 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
