Recruiting Forum Off-Topic Thread II

Status
Not open for further replies.
#9,152
#9,152
WallyBalls said:
Cactist?
Click to expand...

sPwgpLj.gif
 
#9,154
#9,154
UTProf said:
This is incredibly bigoted and offensive. Not to mention laughably wrong.
Click to expand...

Except it is not and he is isn't. But don't let the facts get in the way of your emotional response. He is quoting easily found information and recordings direct from the RCC. I posted an accurate summary of the differences.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#9,155
#9,155
Vols4us said:
Except it is not and he is isn't. But don't let the facts get in the way of your emotional response. He is quoting easily found information and recordings direct from the RCC. I posted an accurate summary of the differences.
Click to expand...

"The Catholic Church rejects the gospel" is not a fact and can't be quoted anywhere lol
 
#9,156
#9,156
Darth_Shiveman said:
"The Catholic Church rejects the gospel" is not a fact and can't be quoted anywhere lol
Click to expand...

"For by grace you have been saved, through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God, NOT BY WORKS, lest any man should boast" (Ephesians 2:8-9).

Council of Trent:
"CANON XIV.-If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified... and that, BY THIS FAITH ALONE, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema."

I'd say they anathematized Paul's gospel in Canon XIV
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9,157
#9,157
Bassmaster_Vol said:
"For by grace you have been saved, through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God, NOT BY WORKS, lest any man should boast" (Ephesians 2:8-9).

Council of Trent:
"CANON XIV.-If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified... and that, BY THIS FAITH ALONE, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema."

I'd say they anathematized Paul's gospel in Canon XIV
Click to expand...

Having a different interpretation of something Paul wrote ≠ "denying the gospel" lol (nice job moving the goalposts from "the gospel," to "Paul's gospel" though lol)


BTW, Jesus's brother had this to say on the issue in James 2:

14What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him?15If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, 16and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? 17So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.


18But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. 19You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder! 20Do you want to be shown, you foolish person, that faith apart from works is useless? 21Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar? 22You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works; 23and the Scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness”—and he was called a friend of God. 24You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. 25And in the same way was not also Rahab the prostitute justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way?26For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead.[31]
Click to expand...

So, yeah Catholics use some verses to back up their interpretation of how to get to heaven. Protestants use some different ones to back up their (ever so slightly different) interpretation. No need to misconstrue facts and claim another group "denies the gospel" just because your faction has a slightly different interpretation.

It comes off as either ignorant or petty. Just a step or two ahead of "Catholics worship statues of Mary, not Jesus!" on that scale.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#9,158
#9,158
Darth_Shiveman said:
Having a different interpretation of something Paul wrote ≠ "denying the gospel" lol (nice job moving the goalposts from "the gospel," to "Paul's gospel" though lol)


BTW, Jesus's brother had this to say on the issue in James 2:



So, yeah Catholics use some verses to back up their interpretation of how to get to heaven. Protestants use some different ones to back up their (ever so slightly different) interpretation. No need to misconstrue facts and claim another group "denies the gospel" just because your faction has a slightly different interpretation.

It comes off as either ignorant or petty. Just a step or two ahead of "Catholics worship statues of Mary, not Jesus!" on that scale.
Click to expand...

I didn't move the goalpost simply for the fact that Paul's gospel=James' gospel and the Bible's gospel. Terminology isn't moving the goalpost. The biblical gospel, not my interpretation, is justification by faith alone.

Once again, just because someone uses a text to justify their belief in something does not make them right. That's why we have hermeneutics, it's why we pay attention to contexts of passages, and James' context is far different than Paul's. Paul is talking about salvation in Ephesians 2 and in Romans 3-4, and in Galatians where he is dealing with the false gospel of works by the Judaizers. James on the other hand, is not dealing with how someone is made right with God. James is contrasting living faith vs dead faith. Living faith will produce good works whereas, someone who claims to have faith, but no good works, proves that their faith is dead, no matter they claim.

Context is important. There is such thing as truth, again, even in this post modern world. And yes, Rome has denied the gospel when they add works.

"Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works:
“Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,and whose sins are covered;
blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin.” Romans 4:4-8.

And again, as Paul makes clear in Galatians 1:6-9, this is not a "slightly" different interpretation. It is a matter of the gospel itself. But i think that is enough of the Roman Catholic argument. think I'll take Ziti's advice now. Fact is, there isn't any reason to continue this discussion the way that it is going with the strange claim that I am misconstruing facts or moving goalposts. I have provided documentation to everything I've said. Hopefully you'll consider it. If not, at least I know that others on this board have read it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9,159
#9,159
Bassmaster_Vol said:
I didn't move the goalpost simply for the fact that Paul's gospel=James' gospel and the Bible's gospel. Terminology isn't moving the goalpost. The biblical gospel, not my interpretation, is justification by faith alone.

Once again, just because someone uses a text to justify their belief in something does not make them right. That's why we have hermeneutics, it's why we pay attention to contexts of passages, and James' context is far different than Paul's. Paul is talking about salvation in Ephesians 2 and in Romans 3-4, and in Galatians where he is dealing with the false gospel of works by the Judaizers. James on the other hand, is not dealing with how someone is made right with God. James is contrasting living faith vs dead faith. Living faith will produce good works whereas, someone who claims to have faith, but no good works, proves that their faith is dead, no matter they claim.

Context is important. There is such thing as truth, again, even in this post modern world. And yes, Rome has denied the gospel when they add works.

"Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works:
“Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,and whose sins are covered;
blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin.” Romans 4:4-8.

And again, as Paul makes clear in Galatians 1:6-9, this is not a "slightly" different interpretation. It is a matter of the gospel itself. But i think that is enough of the Roman Catholic argument. think I'll take Ziti's advice now. Fact is, there isn't any reason to continue this discussion the way that it is going with the strange claim that I am misconstruing facts or moving goalposts. I have provided documentation to everything I've said. Hopefully you'll consider it. If not, at least I know that others on this board have read it.
Click to expand...

I'm happy for others to read this all too. It's hard for non religious folk in the south to speak their minds about these types of things. It's one of the most underrepresented groups in the US. That will probably change in a few decades once millennial's parents and grandparents have passed on and people don't have to worried about being ostracized by their families for their beliefs. The more opportunities for people to see conversations like this, the more they can see it's ok to not follow along just 'cuz.

Anyway, Catholics' views are informed by knowledge and context that the concept of faith as spoken about by ancient Jews means more than belief alone and implies adherence and observance of the laws of (insert belief set here). There are biblical scholars who see James here as correcting the views of the hellenized Paul. Either way, it's quite a leap in logic to assume that just because someone has faith in Jesus that good works will follow. It's a really, really weak counter argument and interpretation of that passage.

Catholics use a lot of verses, also in context, to make heir points too. (1 Peter 3:21, John 3:16 [given the context of the Jewish usage of the word belief], 1John 1:7, Galatians 5:6, among others) You have a response, drilled by protestants for hundreds of years to say "well THAT'S not what that verse really means, HERE'S what it really means" and Catholics have responded drilled for thousands of years to contradict those points and/or any verses opponents use on the topic.

For someone who keeps harping on and on about "truth" and "postmodernism," you sure do love taking subjective things and trying to make them objective. These are the interpretations you've been taught to agree with, but it doesn't make them truth. You can have faith that it is truth, but you can't prove explicitly prove that truth. It seems like someone who's studied even a little theology would know and accept that.

I get that fundamentalism is making a comeback in this country as a kind of backlash to mainstream Americans becoming more socially liberal over the past few decades. However, acting like you and only those who agree with you have access to "truth" is a dangerous kind of fundamentalism. Not necessarily dangerous in that it will lead to dangerous or violent acts or anything. Moreso dangerous because it teaches people to adopt a closed mindset free from introspection/honest self reflection of ones beliefs, values, opinions, and actions and a propensity to disregard new developments or evidences outright.
 
#9,160
#9,160
Darth_Shiveman said:
Having a different interpretation of something Paul wrote ≠ "denying the gospel" lol (nice job moving the goalposts from "the gospel," to "Paul's gospel" though lol)


BTW, Jesus's brother had this to say on the issue in James 2:



So, yeah Catholics use some verses to back up their interpretation of how to get to heaven. Protestants use some different ones to back up their (ever so slightly different) interpretation. No need to misconstrue facts and claim another group "denies the gospel" just because your faction has a slightly different interpretation.

It comes off as either ignorant or petty. Just a step or two ahead of "Catholics worship statues of Mary, not Jesus!" on that scale.
Click to expand...

James and Paul don't disagree. " Justified" has 2 meanings in the Greek language. Paul uses it as to be made righteous before God. James uses it as to demonstrate righteousness before men. The 2 examples that James gives with Abraham and Rahab prove that. They were both reckoned to righteousness by God before their works. The works did not make them right before God, but before men.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9,161
#9,161
Dooby15 said:
James and Paul don't disagree. " Justified" has 2 meanings in the Greek language. Paul uses it as to be made righteous before God. James uses it as to demonstrate righteousness before men. The 2 examples that James gives with Abraham and Rahab prove that. They were both reckoned to righteousness by God before their works. The works did not make them right before God, but before men.
Click to expand...

There is absolutely no evidence that James spoke any languages other than Aramaic or perhaps some Hebrew
 
#9,162
#9,162
Bassmaster_Vol said:
"For by grace you have been saved, through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God, NOT BY WORKS, lest any man should boast" (Ephesians 2:8-9).

Council of Trent:
"CANON XIV.-If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified... and that, BY THIS FAITH ALONE, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema."

I'd say they anathematized Paul's gospel in Canon XIV
Click to expand...

So basically what you are saying is that some Catholic guy stole your girlfriend. :)


Dude, you are quite zealous in your pursuit of superiority. It's almost like a jihad...without the violence. :no:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#9,164
#9,164
Darth_Shiveman said:
I'm happy for others to read this all too. It's hard for non religious folk in the south to speak their minds about these types of things. It's one of the most underrepresented groups in the US. That will probably change in a few decades once millennial's parents and grandparents have passed on and people don't have to worried about being ostracized by their families for their beliefs. The more opportunities for people to see conversations like this, the more they can see it's ok to not follow along just 'cuz.

Anyway, Catholics' views are informed by knowledge and context that the concept of faith as spoken about by ancient Jews means more than belief alone and implies adherence and observance of the laws of (insert belief set here). There are biblical scholars who see James here as correcting the views of the hellenized Paul. Either way, it's quite a leap in logic to assume that just because someone has faith in Jesus that good works will follow. It's a really, really weak counter argument and interpretation of that passage.

Catholics use a lot of verses, also in context, to make heir points too. (1 Peter 3:21, John 3:16 [given the context of the Jewish usage of the word belief], 1John 1:7, Galatians 5:6, among others) You have a response, drilled by protestants for hundreds of years to say "well THAT'S not what that verse really means, HERE'S what it really means" and Catholics have responded drilled for thousands of years to contradict those points and/or any verses opponents use on the topic.

For someone who keeps harping on and on about "truth" and "postmodernism," you sure do love taking subjective things and trying to make them objective. These are the interpretations you've been taught to agree with, but it doesn't make them truth. You can have faith that it is truth, but you can't prove explicitly prove that truth. It seems like someone who's studied even a little theology would know and accept that.

I get that fundamentalism is making a comeback in this country as a kind of backlash to mainstream Americans becoming more socially liberal over the past few decades. However, acting like you and only those who agree with you have access to "truth" is a dangerous kind of fundamentalism. Not necessarily dangerous in that it will lead to dangerous or violent acts or anything. Moreso dangerous because it teaches people to adopt a closed mindset free from introspection/honest self reflection of ones beliefs, values, opinions, and actions and a propensity to disregard new developments or evidences outright.
Click to expand...

Darth, I enjoy your post. You are obviously well read and have studied the bible. But, as a non believer, you have try to prove that others are wrong about their faith. I'm not sure of your goals here. Your post come across as condescending and belittling to others almost to the point you think they are less intelligent because they don't share your views. Wait till all the stupid old folks pass on so us smarter younger generation can not be inflenced to have a faith in a higher power and be dumbed down by religion.

It is well within your right to not believe and have no hope beyond this life. I just don't get your motivation in trying disprove the faith of others.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#9,165
#9,165
InVOLuntary said:
Darth, I enjoy your post. You are obviously well read and have studied the bible. But, as a non believer, you have try to prove that others are wrong about their faith. I'm not sure of your goals here. Your post come across as condescending and belittling to others almost to the point you think they are less intelligent because they don't share your views. Wait till all the stupid old folks pass on so us smarter younger generation can not be inflenced to have a faith in a higher power and be dumbed down by religion.

It is well within your right to not believe and have no hope beyond this life. I just don't get your motivation in trying disprove the faith of others.
Click to expand...

I enjoy their discussion, it takes two to tango and on here even more. If people do not take a liking to Darth's tone, they should not engage. I for one am glad they do as I find it all fascinating.
 
#9,169
#9,169
InVOLuntary said:
Darth, I enjoy your post. You are obviously well read and have studied the bible. But, as a non believer, you have try to prove that others are wrong about their faith. I'm not sure of your goals here. Your post come across as condescending and belittling to others almost to the point you think they are less intelligent because they don't share your views. Wait till all the stupid old folks pass on so us smarter younger generation can not be inflenced to have a faith in a higher power and be dumbed down by religion.

It is well within your right to not believe and have no hope beyond this life. I just don't get your motivation in trying disprove the faith of others.
Click to expand...

It wasn't my intention to call people less intelligent or stupid old folks at all.

But it's a fact that non believers are underrepresented in this country. And, especially in the more religious parts of the country, people are hesitant to out themselves as non believers because of the connotations that go along with it. I know a lot of people who consider themselves atheist/agnostic/humanist/etc, but mostly keep it to themselves because of the backlash they know they'll get from family memebers if they out themselves.


It's not so much "I'm waiting for all the stupid religious folk to die" as it is "Man, my mom/grandma/etc might cry herself to sleep every night if she knew I'm agnostic/atheist/humanist/etc. I don't wanna cause her the grief of having to worry about my eternal soul all the time (or take the tongue lashing from other family members that might go along with that), so I'll just keep it to myself for now."


The non-religious are currently estimated to be around 16% of the US. But there's no way to calculate the number of closeted non-religious ATM, which is probably not insignificant. A few decades from now when millennial are the ones filling out census forms, it wouldn't surprise me if that number is somewhere around 30-40% is all I'm saying.
 
#9,170
#9,170
InVOLuntary said:
Darth, I enjoy your post. You are obviously well read and have studied the bible. But, as a non believer, you have try to prove that others are wrong about their faith. I'm not sure of your goals here. Your post come across as condescending and belittling to others almost to the point you think they are less intelligent because they don't share your views. Wait till all the stupid old folks pass on so us smarter younger generation can not be inflenced to have a faith in a higher power and be dumbed down by religion.

It is well within your right to not believe and have no hope beyond this life. I just don't get your motivation in trying disprove the faith of others.
Click to expand...

Many of the younger generation believe that science can explain away religion. They think that if they can find a scientific reason for a phenomenon they can disprove the existence of God and free our world of the scourge of religion. Science and religion are not mutually exclusive to one another. The idea that even one complex species could exist on this perfectly placed planet with all the necessary components to sustain it without an intelligent designer behind it is almost laughable. Some scientists have calculated that the odds of life forming naturally, even the most simple organisms, is 1 in 10 to the 40,000th power. Basically, even if you put all the matter in the universe together in one big soup, it still would not be able to naturally create even the most simple life. If we stop to think about how complicated life is on this planet and the enormous number of species and the complexity of the eco-systems, it is impossible to consider that there was not an intelligent designer behind the whole thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#9,171
#9,171
As for my motivations, it's simple: encourage a dialogue where people where people can question things they normally aren't allowed to (or rather, don't feel comfortable to) question.

If some read my posts and come away more solid in your faith, then more power to him/her/xer (lol jk jk). If you come away with questions or doubts, then (IMO) there's probably a very good reason for that. Hopefully you'll look further into those questions and decide for yourself.
 
#9,172
#9,172
Glitch said:
Many of the younger generation believe that science can explain away religion. They think that if they can find a scientific reason for a phenomenon they can disprove the existence of God and free our world of the scourge of religion. Science and religion are not mutually exclusive to one another. The idea that even one complex species could exist on this perfectly placed planet with all the necessary components to sustain it without an intelligent designer behind it is almost laughable. Some scientists have calculated that the odds of life forming naturally, even the most simple organisms, is 1 in 10 to the 40,000th power. Basically, even if you put all the matter in the universe together in one big soup, it still would not be able to naturally create even the most simple life. If we stop to think about how complicated life is on this planet and the enormous number of species and the complexity of the eco-systems, it is impossible to consider that there was not an intelligent designer behind the whole thing.
Click to expand...

[citation needed]
 
#9,173
#9,173
Glitch said:
Many of the younger generation believe that science can explain away religion. They think that if they can find a scientific reason for a phenomenon they can disprove the existence of God and free our world of the scourge of religion. Science and religion are not mutually exclusive to one another. The idea that even one complex species could exist on this perfectly placed planet with all the necessary components to sustain it without an intelligent designer behind it is almost laughable. Some scientists have calculated that the odds of life forming naturally, even the most simple organisms, is 1 in 10 to the 40,000th power. Basically, even if you put all the matter in the universe together in one big soup, it still would not be able to naturally create even the most simple life. If we stop to think about how complicated life is on this planet and the enormous number of species and the complexity of the eco-systems, it is impossible to consider that there was not an intelligent designer behind the whole thing.
Click to expand...
You can also say if God created us why couldn't he have created other intelligent beings and spaces then out far enough to where we will never meet?
 
#9,174
#9,174
Rishvol said:
You can also say if God created us why couldn't he have created other intelligent beings and spaces then out far enough to where we will never meet?
Click to expand...

Who is to say the world isn't flat and supported on the back of the World Turtle? What's under that turtle you ask? More turtles.
 
#9,175
#9,175
Rishvol said:
You can also say if God created us why couldn't he have created other intelligent beings and spaces then out far enough to where we will never meet?
Click to expand...

And of course there's always the possibility that there is an intelligent designer who washed his hands from it all once he set the whole shindig in motion. Or just considered our universe like a small side project or something.
 
New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement



Back
Top