Let's compare Jesus and Muhammed (and debate homosexuality) (and Tombstone).

[therealUT]

You've heard the word and choose to not believe. Your choice, so carry on. What benefit do you gain by trying to "help" others see as you do? Are these dirty, rotten Christians destroying something precious to you?

You are destroying reason.

 

[IPorange]

You've heard the word and choose to not believe. Your choice, so carry on. What benefit do you gain by trying to "help" others see as you do? Are these dirty, rotten Christians destroying something precious to you?

I heard an old story with little credibility. I can choose to discuss it and marvel at how many have a very different perspective than me. I don't see why this bothers you so much.

I've never called Christians dirty or rotten. I do think many who have faith-based values do things that influence my life and country in ways that I feel are negative and ignorant. Thus, it is worth my time to discuss faith.

 

[JayVols]

It seems that the non believers not only want to discredit Jesus but also have an agenda to preach there disbelief to encourage the person that's mind is not made up to embrace there way.To cause one soul to be tempted it would indeed be better for him to have a millstone hung around his neck and cast into the sea.

Or you could look at it as an opportunity to respectfully share what you believe. Arguing and name calling gets Christians nowhere, fast. It turns people off and puts them on the defensive. I have offered to talk privately with anyone who wishes. No pressure, but they know that it is there should they decide. That's all I can do. Jesus took a patient and respectful approach; shouldn't we do the same?

The non-believers on here are not bad folks. I like a good portion of them. As a matter of fact, I see many 'non-believers' on the board conducting themselves better than 'believers'. I can attest that every discussion that I have entered, I try to do so respectfully and that respect was returned. If you think that being bitter and snippy is going to help an unbeliever understand the love that one (at least I) feel from my service to God, you are sorely mistaken.

There will be differences. That's life. I don't have to agree with someone that doesn't share my view, but I also don't have to be confrontational and rude. Through discussion comes understanding. With understanding comes respect. And if the goal is to spread the word, through respect that message can get through more easily and clearly.

Expressing my views on the board may not impact a single person, but I have done what is required of me, sharing the love, forgiveness, and strength that I have gained in my faith. It is not our place to brow-beat someone into belief. We share, God convicts the heart, and each individual accepts or declines. That's it. I will still respect and enjoy my conversations with others even if they disagree. We are charged to treat all our fellow man with a sense of dignity.:hi:

 

[gsvol]

In what countries of the Arab world is slavery permitted? If I may ask...
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Mauritania for one, there are nearly a million black Africans who live as slaves there, most have for many generations.

Since the Arab moslems have taken control of the Sudan they have been taking slaves from southern Sudan.

Although ostensibly slavery is outlawed, it is practiced on the QT in Saudi Arabia and other states where islamic law rules supreme.

In Pakistan for instance, although one doesn't own a slave per se, loans are made which can never be paid and so the borrower (and sometimes his children) must work all their lives to pay the debt.

The same think is happening to America for future generations if you take time to crunch the numbers.

National Debt Clock

 

[ridethelightening]

Or you could look at it as an opportunity to respectfully share what you believe. Arguing and name calling gets Christians nowhere, fast. It turns people off and puts them on the defensive. I have offered to talk privately with anyone who wishes. No pressure, but they know that it is there should they decide. That's all I can do. Jesus took a patient and respectful approach; shouldn't we do the same?

The non-believers on here are not bad folks. I like a good portion of them. As a matter of fact, I see many 'non-believers' on the board conducting themselves better than 'believers'. I can attest that every discussion that I have entered, I try to do so respectfully and that respect was returned. If you think that being bitter and snippy is going to help an unbeliever understand the love that one (at least I) feel from my service to God, you are sorely mistaken.

There will be differences. That's life. I don't have to agree with someone that doesn't share my view, but I also don't have to be confrontational and rude. Through discussion comes understanding. With understanding comes respect. And if the goal is to spread the word, through respect that message can get through more easily and clearly.

Expressing my views on the board may not impact a single person, but I have done what is required of me, sharing the love, forgiveness, and strength that I have gained in my faith. It is not our place to brow-beat someone into belief. We share, God convicts the heart, and each individual accepts or declines. That's it. I will still respect and enjoy my conversations with others even if they disagree. We are charged to treat all our fellow man with a sense of dignity.:hi:

I will take this to heart

 

[VolsNSkinsFan]

TRUT, just read the Bible. Leave the other out of it. I hardly consider Catholicism as a christian religion.

1.3 billion people disagree
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[DocVOLiday]

Or you could look at it as an opportunity to respectfully share what you believe. Arguing and name calling gets Christians nowhere, fast. It turns people off and puts them on the defensive. I have offered to talk privately with anyone who wishes. No pressure, but they know that it is there should they decide. That's all I can do. Jesus took a patient and respectful approach; shouldn't we do the same?

The non-believers on here are not bad folks. I like a good portion of them. As a matter of fact, I see many 'non-believers' on the board conducting themselves better than 'believers'. I can attest that every discussion that I have entered, I try to do so respectfully and that respect was returned. If you think that being bitter and snippy is going to help an unbeliever understand the love that one (at least I) feel from my service to God, you are sorely mistaken.

There will be differences. That's life. I don't have to agree with someone that doesn't share my view, but I also don't have to be confrontational and rude. Through discussion comes understanding. With understanding comes respect. And if the goal is to spread the word, through respect that message can get through more easily and clearly.

Expressing my views on the board may not impact a single person, but I have done what is required of me, sharing the love, forgiveness, and strength that I have gained in my faith. It is not our place to brow-beat someone into belief. We share, God convicts the heart, and each individual accepts or declines. That's it. I will still respect and enjoy my conversations with others even if they disagree. We are charged to treat all our fellow man with a sense of dignity.:hi:

Well said. I like how you show that Christians can be reasonable and logical, not just some religious zealot (who hate non-christians) as many on here believe. Thank you for that
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[gsvol]

and if the first step never happens you're just SOL? Sucks

If the shoe fits.

According to Christian Canon, you cannot know it is the word of God without the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Then what is your problem?

Your belief is contrary to that of Christian Canon, Doctrine, and Tradition: the writings of the Catholic Church, Catholic Theologians, Calvin, Luther, C.S. Lewis, etc.

You don't happen to be a defrocked pedophile Catholic priest do you??

Just wondering.

Better or worse than murdering an unbeliever?

What do you think?

Since you brought it up, can you name a Christian sect that teaches to murder the unbeliever or a moslem sect that does NOT teach to slay the infidel??

 

[gsvol]

This is going to turn into a daily SOP.

You are an extreme example of the 'strain at a gnat and swallow a camel' ilk.

Point out the typo, ignore the point.

Maybe those Arabs wrote a genocidal "I.O.U.", and will work towards the total a little at a time.

Considering their 1400 year history of depradations on Africa, the Asian subcontinent and southern Eurpope and they don't owe that much.

If you want to discuss circular logic, the gospels, and Christianity, have at it GS. Let me see if I remember this correctly:

1. To accept the Holy Spirit, one must be baptized.
2. To understand the scripture, one must receive guidance and interpretation from the Holy Spirit.
3. If one reads and understands the scriptures, they will choose to accept Christ and the Holy Spirit.

Something in there does not add up.

Two of your three suppositions are incorrect.

It doesn't add up because you don't have the Holy Spirit, I suspect.

Or who is to say he even has a soul, he seems to deny it.

 

[arTfuldodger]

Or you could look at it as an opportunity to respectfully share what you believe. Arguing and name calling gets Christians nowhere, fast. It turns people off and puts them on the defensive. I have offered to talk privately with anyone who wishes. No pressure, but they know that it is there should they decide. That's all I can do. Jesus took a patient and respectful approach; shouldn't we do the same?

The non-believers on here are not bad folks. I like a good portion of them. As a matter of fact, I see many 'non-believers' on the board conducting themselves better than 'believers'. I can attest that every discussion that I have entered, I try to do so respectfully and that respect was returned. If you think that being bitter and snippy is going to help an unbeliever understand the love that one (at least I) feel from my service to God, you are sorely mistaken.

There will be differences. That's life. I don't have to agree with someone that doesn't share my view, but I also don't have to be confrontational and rude. Through discussion comes understanding. With understanding comes respect. And if the goal is to spread the word, through respect that message can get through more easily and clearly.

Expressing my views on the board may not impact a single person, but I have done what is required of me, sharing the love, forgiveness, and strength that I have gained in my faith. It is not our place to brow-beat someone into belief. We share, God convicts the heart, and each individual accepts or declines. That's it. I will still respect and enjoy my conversations with others even if they disagree. We are charged to treat all our fellow man with a sense of dignity.:hi:

You, my friend, have some perspective. (Hats off)
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[IPorange]

I never understood the catholic disownment frommany American Protestants. They clearly follow Christ and have a direct line to an apostle. If they say they're Christian, who is to tell them they're not?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[sjt18]

I never understood the catholic disownment frommany American Protestants. They clearly follow Christ and have a direct line to an apostle. If they say they're Christian, who is to tell them they're not?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Doctrine. Protestants and other non-Catholic groups deny Catholic tradition and dogma. At the very foundation of it... we disagree very fundamentally on how salvation is attained.

I speak very narrowly as a Baptist though the answer would be similar for any biblical fundamentalist (someone who relies on the Bible as their final authority for all matters or faith and practice).

If the doctrines of Catholicism accurately define what a Christian is then Baptists are not Christians... and vice versa.

IIRC, you profess atheism. An atheist by definition is not an agnostic. You may share many of the same beliefs and objections but it is not the same. That is how Catholicism differs from biblical Christians.

 

[CSVol]

I never understood the catholic disownment frommany American Protestants. They clearly follow Christ and have a direct line to an apostle. If they say they're Christian, who is to tell them they're not?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

It's the whole 'need a mediator between one and God' thing. Catholicism dictates confession to a preist as a go between whereas most Protestants believe in a direct personal relationship with God. Help me out TRUT, there's a term for their belief..'trans' something.

 

[therealUT]

Doctrine. Protestants and other non-Catholic groups deny Catholic tradition and dogma. At the very foundation of it... we disagree very fundamentally on how salvation is attained.

I speak very narrowly as a Baptist though the answer would be similar for any biblical fundamentalist (someone who relies on the Bible as their final authority for all matters or faith and practice).

If the doctrines of Catholicism accurately define what a Christian is then Baptists are not Christians... and vice versa.

IIRC, you profess atheism. An atheist by definition is not an agnostic. You may share many of the same beliefs and objections but it is not the same. That is how Catholicism differs from biblical Christians.

Your assumption regarding Catholic doctrine is wrong. Feel free to read the Catechism to see that the Catholic Church not only sees all Trinitarian Protestants as Christians but also accepts their baptisms (i.e., if a Baptist converts to Catholicism, the individual is not baptized again).

 

[therealUT]

It's the whole 'need a mediator between one and God' thing. Catholicism dictates confession to a preist as a go between whereas most Protestants believe in a direct personal relationship with God. Help me out TRUT, there's a term for their belief..'trans' something.

Confession to a priest is available but is not mandatory for salvation. A priest is simply a Mediatrix for a Catholic as regards confession. Protestants also take issue with the Catholic use of intercessory prayers and transubstantiation; yet, none of these, according to Catholic Doctrine and Dogma, are required for salvation.

 

[ridethelightening]

Confession to a priest is available but is not mandatory for salvation. A priest is simply a Mediatrix for a Catholic as regards confession. Protestants also take issue with the Catholic use of intercessory prayers and transubstantiation; yet, none of these, according to Catholic Doctrine and Dogma, are required for salvation.

What about paying for forgiveness?

 

[CSVol]

Confession to a priest is available but is not mandatory for salvation. A priest is simply a Mediatrix for a Catholic as regards confession. Protestants also take issue with the Catholic use of intercessory prayers and transubstantiation; yet, none of these, according to Catholic Doctrine and Dogma, are required for salvation.

Transubstantiation v. consubstantiation was what I was trying to remember (and I was using it in the wrong context). Don't Catholics believe that only priests, bishops, ect. can preform the sacrements needed for salvation?

 

[ridethelightening]

Not to mention the veneration of Mary, more than 1 book as doctrine, baptism, different types of sin, Pope's direct link to God, ability to pardon sin on Earth, etc. etc.

 

[therealUT]

What about paying for forgiveness?

That is not Dogma. It was Doctrine in the middle ages and has since been discarded. However, it was doctrine based on Jewish Tradition and Scripture and the Pauline Epistles (as he demanded payment for the glory of God in almost every epistle he wrote, the payment proved the commitment and belief of the communities).

 

[therealUT]

Transubstantiation v. consubstantiation was what I was trying to remember (and I was using it in the wrong context). Don't Catholics believe that only priests, bishops, ect. can preform the sacrements needed for salvation?

Not quite. In fact, baptisms can be performed by any other Catholic (as, according to the Catechism all Catholics are priests, just not Priests). An individual can choose to either confess his sins in solitude and individual prayer or confess them to a Priest. The only sacrament that requires a Priest is the transubstantiation; according to Catholic Doctrine, a Catholic is required to receive the Eucharist at least once a year; non-Catholics and non-Christians are never required to receive the Eucharist and can still attain salvation.

 

[gsvol]

Daily bump.

And you are dumping on yourself.

So what if I made a typo??

Someone asked you to name where Christians had slaughtered others to the tune of hundreds of thousands and you cited Uganda and Serbia, both claims being PATENTELY FALSE.

After refuting your claim I asked you about the millions slaughtered in the name of islam (combined with arab supremacist ideology) in the Sudan and you have NO ANSWER!

Basically you are painting a false picture and you are, (or at least claim to be,) too intelligent not to know that you aren't lying through your teeth.

 

[therealUT]

Not to mention the veneration of Mary, more than 1 book as doctrine, baptism, different types of sin, Pope's direct link to God, ability to pardon sin on Earth, etc. etc.

Please explain your understanding the the "veneration of Mary". Many persons view this as somehow placing Mary on the level of God and somehow believe that she has the ability to forgive sins, judge, etc. She does not. She is simply, according to Catholic Dogma, the very highest Mediatrix. Catholics are in no way required to ever pray through (note, they never pray to) Mary.

The point regarding having more than one book as doctrine is ridiculous. The Catechism is based directly off of the interpretation of the scriptures and every last regulation is chalk full of scripture citations. It is simply an annal of Biblical texts, which provides a quick and easy reference regarding rules and regulations that are espoused throughout the Old and New Testaments.

Venal sins v. Mortal Sins. Venal sins are those sins in which one commits basically through negligence, ignorance, and omission (this is a very simple breakdown). Mortal sins are sins that are deliberate and committed with an understanding, by the individual, that they are committing a sin. Venal sins are forgiven without any penance; mortal sins require some kind of penance by the sinner, whether that occurs here on Earth or in Purgatory. I am not sure why you take umbrage with this distinction.

The Pope has a direct link to God? Maybe you should write the Vatican and let them know that.

Didn't Jesus give his apostles with the ability to bind and loose sins?

 

[VolsNSkinsFan]

What about paying for forgiveness?

That has no accountability. I could kill someone and pray about it and my sin would be forgiven? At least if you confess your sin to a priest he will require some sort of penance (turning yourself over to authorities would be the 1st thing)
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[IPorange]

And you are dumping on yourself.

So what if I made a typo??

Someone asked you to name where Christians had slaughtered others to the tune of hundreds of thousands and you cited Uganda and Serbia, both claims being PATENTELY FALSE.

After refuting your claim I asked you about the millions slaughtered in the name of islam (combined with arab supremacist ideology) in the Sudan and you have NO ANSWER!

Basically you are painting a false picture and you are, (or at least claim to be,) too intelligent not to know that you aren't lying through your teeth.

You being in denial doesn't make something patently false.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[KiffinKiller]

you being in denial doesn't make something patently false.
posted via volnation mobile

yes it does! Rawr