Also, feel free to ask questions Lucas. There’s no such thing as a stupid question. We can’t know some things unless we ask.
Lucas, I just saw that there is an actual wikipedia entry for your question as well. Had some interesting stuff in it that I never knew!
[QUOTE=goju;1099458]Actually they did it in the name of gold:D: Religion was merely used as an excuse to do it.[/QUOTE]
The Catholic Church has a history of greed. They used to sell “indulgences” after all. I also believe that’s why they force priests to be celibate and not marry. Who do you think most of them will their possessions and money to when they die? It’s quite odd they tell the rank-and-file Catholics to not use birth control, yet demand the ones preaching/teaching the religion have no offspring.
oh sweet im going to read that. thanks! ya it usually seems like a nice thing. or people say it after you sneeze sometimes.
[QUOTE=Lucas;1099420]ok now this is going to be really stupid sounding i think to most people but why do a lot of the christians (i assume they are christians maybe not ) ‘bless me’ or tell me they are ‘blessed’? i honestly dont get it. i just want to know what thats all about. is that from a certain type of christianity?
sorry if i disrespect anyone with that question.
just so you know as they come up i’ll put all my stupid questions here, as long as people respond i’ll keep being stupid. :D[/QUOTE]
Christianity has an evangeliical aspect to it. “Spread the good news!”.
I would think that people who make their belief known through this action are in fact practicing a little bit of evangelism.
And yes, the pope would sell blessings more or less at one time. You could essentially buy your way out of sinning. lol medieval people weren’t all together brilliant in many ways.
[QUOTE=BJJ-Blue;1099450]
Yes it did. The Catholic nation of Spain was trying to conquer the Protestant nation of England in the name of religion. The Catholic Church did not recognize Elizabeth I as the rightful monarch of England and they were furious she basically banned saying Mass. Also England supported the Protestants in the Netherlands who were hostile to Spain. Phillip II, the spanish king, openly championed Catholocism and that religion greatly influenced his policies.
Spain also murdered and enslaved the natives of the Americas in the name of the Catholic religion.[/QUOTE]
It had nothing to do with religion and everything to do with Spanish expansionisim and imperialism.
Don’t forget that Spain occupied Portugal, also a Catholic country.
The Netherlands were a “vassal” state that, according to Spain, were rebelling.
Phillip used religion as an excuse, nothing more.
It was just one of the many cases of religion being used as an excuse and why?
The RC church in spain had serious coin and was stupid enough to use it to further it’s influence and to get the “OK” from the Pope, the excuse of religion was used, as usual.
[QUOTE=BJJ-Blue;1099474]The Catholic Church has a history of greed. They used to sell “indulgences” after all. I also believe that’s why they force priests to be celibate and not marry. Who do you think most of them will their possessions and money to when they die? It’s quite odd they tell the rank-and-file Catholics to not use birth control, yet demand the ones preaching/teaching the religion have no offspring.[/QUOTE]
Quite correct, the RCC was and still is badly in need of reform.
[QUOTE=Lucas;1099420]ok now this is going to be really stupid sounding i think to most people but why do a lot of the christians (i assume they are christians maybe not ) ‘bless me’ or tell me they are ‘blessed’? i honestly dont get it. i just want to know what thats all about. is that from a certain type of christianity?
sorry if i disrespect anyone with that question.
just so you know as they come up i’ll put all my stupid questions here, as long as people respond i’ll keep being stupid. :D[/QUOTE]
To be blessed is to be under God’s divine grace ( in general) and to be thankful for God’s many gifts to Us and Other, through Our Lord Jesus Christ.
Grace is God’s unconditonal love for us, an unmerited gift.
Much like parents give their unconditonal love for their children.
Grace is God not loving you anymore than he does because he loves you absolutely.
There is nothing you can do or have to do, to earn that Grace, it is given freely to you through Christ.
Hence we are blessed.
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1099342]All religions stem from the same source ( well, almost all) and they are simply different expressions of that source ( that source being God).[/quote]
Um, nowhere in most religions is any such connection made, aside from the judeo-Christian ones. Simply renaming a force in another religion that does not require belief in the zombie child “God” to make it synonymous with the Christian one that does is pretty frail argumentation.
Most religions will have very similar cores ( golden rule for example).
The Golden Rule predates Christianity(not that you don’t know this), and is a moral dictum, not religious in content, but used in religion and outside of it. It’s presence does prove a common human source, but not a common theological or religious source. Hell, Hobbes’ Leviathan is, in one sense, an atheist view of the need for such an approach to have a functioning society, not a proof of God as a common source of that idea.
The only religions that are wrong are religions that advocate hate and violence, indifference and no compassion.
There is no religion that somewhere in sacred texts (that its followers would never dare expunge) doesn’t do exactly this, to outsiders at the very least. This is not the fault of religion: Confucianism, and not just the state system of it, has plenty of quotes about what should be done to so and so for going against the grain, even quotes ascribed to Confucius. The difference is that philosophies and groups that do this don’t have the recourse of saying “because Zeus said so”, and so their arguments tend to disappear over time as the crux of philosophical argument changes, while religions tend to moderate as their arguments on reality become destroyed and they enter the shifting sand of “it’s not all literal,” but they are always stuck with so-called sacred texts that are hard to reconcile without bringing into question their sacredness.
[QUOTE=KC Elbows;1099565]Um, nowhere in most religions is any such connection made, aside from the judeo-Christian ones. Simply renaming a force in another religion that does not require belief in the zombie child “God” to make it synonymous with the Christian one that does is pretty frail argumentation.
The Golden Rule predates Christianity(not that you don’t know this), and is a moral dictum, not religious in content, but used in religion and outside of it. It’s presence does prove a common human source, but not a common theological or religious source. Hell, Hobbes’ Leviathan is, in one sense, an atheist view of the need for such an approach to have a functioning society, not a proof of God as a common source of that idea.
There is no religion that somewhere in sacred texts (that its followers would never dare expunge) doesn’t do exactly this, to outsiders at the very least. This is not the fault of religion: Confucianism, and not just the state system of it, has plenty of quotes about what should be done to so and so for going against the grain, even quotes ascribed to Confucius. The difference is that philosophies and groups that do this don’t have the recourse of saying “because Zeus said so”, and so their arguments tend to disappear over time as the crux of philosophical argument changes, while religions tend to moderate as their arguments on reality become destroyed and they enter the shifting sand of “it’s not all literal,” but they are always stuck with so-called sacred texts that are hard to reconcile without bringing into question their sacredness.[/QUOTE]
KC, the thread started asked our views on religion, not the “offical view of religion A about religion B”.
As for the Golden Rule, yes it predates Christianity and most other religions ( it is but a starting point in Christianity like I mentioned), but since religion and culture/society goes hand-in-hand and it is almost impossible to state which came first, it is logical to conclude that the “golden rule” is a by-product of religion.
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1099567]KC, the thread started asked our views on religion, not the “offical view of religion A about religion B”.
:p[/quote]
I know, but it seems like, at some point, you’d have to reconcile having to accept Jesus vs. having to express ultimate compassion free of even a concept of
Jesus vs. heaven as an ultimate reward vs. heavens as merely a pleasant form of punishment.
As for the Golden Rule, yes it predates Christianity and most other religions ( it is but a starting point in Christianity like I mentioned), but since religion and culture/society goes hand-in-hand and it is almost impossible to state which came first, it is logical to conclude that the “golden rule” is a by-product of religion.
The common shaping hands that one can prove are humans and the pressures on them.
I know, but it seems like, at some point, you’d have to reconcile having to accept Jesus vs. having to express ultimate compassion free of even a concept of
Jesus vs. heaven as an ultimate reward vs. heavens as merely a pleasant form of punishment.
Trying to reconcile Jesus as the “one and only way to God” is not easy when you see some much that is also right in other religions.
Personally it’s not MY place to judge others or their faith and from what I understand, as a christian, Christ will judge all based on how We judge others and based on how He KNOWS our true heart ( perhaps better than we do).
We are all under God’s grace and as such we ALL have the chance for everlasting life, but in the end, the choice to reject Christ is Ours but to reject Christ one must truly KNOW Him and I don’t know of anyone that has KNOWN Christ and rejected him.
YET, the bible and history shows that some do.
That said, I think the Greeks were right. Their religion never attempted to move beyond human experience, and thus never went into ground on which they had no direct experience, while not idolizing human conduct. So you have the king, he sleeps around, abducts women, gets all huffy, his wife destroys those women, whom he does little to help, etc. Greek mythology is a lesson in human foibles, while many later religions are written by humans as though they have knowledge beyond the human range.
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1099578]Trying to reconcile Jesus as the “one and only way to God” is not easy when you see some much that is also right in other religions.
Personally it’s not MY place to judge others or their faith and from what I understand, as a christian, Christ will judge all based on how We judge others and based on how He KNOWS our true heart ( perhaps better than we do).
We are all under God’s grace and as such we ALL have the chance for everlasting life, but in the end, the choice to reject Christ is Ours but to reject Christ one must truly KNOW Him and I don’t know of anyone that has KNOWN Christ and rejected him.
YET, the bible and history shows that some do.[/QUOTE]
In your view, would one who accepts something that in essence was closest to Christ, but had no historical or religious conception of Christ(or was misinformed on the topic), go to heaven?
Meaning, person X has accepted, based on largely non-Christian sources, possibly non-religious, that compassion, kindness, etc, are the way to go, and lives that way. Now, the only Christians he knows about are Branch Davidians, and so he’s quite suspect of this Jesus character. Where does he stand?
[QUOTE=KC Elbows;1099582]In your view, would one who accepts something that in essence was closest to Christ, but had no historical or religious conception of Christ(or was misinformed on the topic), go to heaven?
Meaning, person X has accepted, based on largely non-Christian sources, possibly non-religious, that compassion, kindness, etc, are the way to go, and lives that way. Now, the only Christians he knows about are Branch Davidians, and so he’s quite suspect of this Jesus character. Where does he stand?[/QUOTE]
When we die, are are exposed to the ultimate truth.
Our spirit goes to heaven, our bodies decay and go back to the “dust” they were before.
Our spirit stays in Heaven ( for lack of a better term) where time is not applicable.
On the final day of judgment, our bodies are ressurected and our spirit returns to them.
Judgment will be had then and that judgment is based on what he rejected.
Christ said that only the blasphemy of the holy spirit would “kill the soul” and that blasphemy is to KNOW God and REJECT God.
So, in short, all those that accept God when God is truly KNOWN to them, will have everlasting life and those that reject God will, well…have what they want.
No God.
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1099587]When we die, are are exposed to the ultimate truth.
Our spirit goes to heaven, our bodies decay and go back to the “dust” they were before.
Our spirit stays in Heaven ( for lack of a better term) where time is not applicable.
On the final day of judgment, our bodies are ressurected and our spirit returns to them.
Judgment will be had then and that judgment is based on what he rejected.
Christ said that only the blasphemy of the holy spirit would “kill the soul” and that blasphemy is to KNOW God and REJECT God.
So, in short, all those that accept God when God is truly KNOWN to them, will have everlasting life and those that reject God will, well…have what they want.
No God.[/QUOTE]
Interesting. So, is faith in life more a matter of hoping to practice appreciation and refinement of what one hopes to be capable of accepting of when it is revealed?
[QUOTE=KC Elbows;1099595]Interesting. So, is faith in life more a matter of hoping to practice appreciation and refinement of what one hopes to be capable of accepting of when it is revealed?[/QUOTE]
Nothing we do can assure us of salvation, nothing we do is “good enough” because the moment we do something with ulterior motives, it is “tainted”.
Hence God’s gift of Grace.
We can practice appreciation and refinement in its purest forms when we accepted that it can’t be done without God, since we will do it for a mirade of reasons and all of them selfish, pridefull and egotistical, as is our nature.
The “fall” happened because Humans decided that they didn’t need God, they they wanted to be God and that they were Gods.
Yet, without God, what do we have? Selfish and ulterior motives for everything we do.
One of the best ways to look at it is from the POV of being Parents.
We love our kids, uncondtionally and we do our best to raise them in that love.
We teach them the best we can.
We don’t ask them to do good to please us, we want them to be good because it is right.
They want to please us not because they have to or they get a reward, but because they love us so much.
There is nothing they can do to make us love them even more because we love them as much as it possible to love.
And yet our love has limits ( right now) and God’s has no limits.
Imagine our love and make it infinite and you have a small notion of what God’s love is.
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1099599]Nothing we do can assure us of salvation, nothing we do is “good enough” because the moment we do something with ulterior motives, it is “tainted”.
Hence God’s gift of Grace.
We can practice appreciation and refinement in its purest forms when we accepted that it can’t be done without God, since we will do it for a mirade of reasons and all of them selfish, pridefull and egotistical, as is our nature.
The “fall” happened because Humans decided that they didn’t need God, they they wanted to be God and that they were Gods.
Yet, without God, what do we have? Selfish and ulterior motives for everything we do.
One of the best ways to look at it is from the POV of being Parents.
We love our kids, uncondtionally and we do our best to raise them in that love.
We teach them the best we can.
We don’t ask them to do good to please us, we want them to be good because it is right.
They want to please us not because they have to or they get a reward, but because they love us so much.
There is nothing they can do to make us love them even more because we love them as much as it possible to love.
And yet our love has limits ( right now) and God’s has no limits.
Imagine our love and make it infinite and you have a small notion of what God’s love is.[/QUOTE]
That’s a great analogy SR.
[QUOTE=JamesC;1099601]That’s a great analogy SR.[/QUOTE]
Well, we are made in HIS image.
The reason Christ wanted us to understand God as Our Father is to understand what he requires and why.
He isn’t some aloof being in a different dimension that pops in every so often to check on his “creation”.
Heaven and Earth intersect in His Son and in His gift of the Holy Spirit, it is HERE, NOW, WITH US.
What we do with it is up to us.
SR, I have a question for you.
I’ve noticed a trend in some Churches of taking “The Lord is My Shepherd” a little too literally, imo. To the point that some people are almost completely helpless to do things themselves, almost using God as a crutch in everything that they do.
I’m not saying that we can’t lean on him. That’s what he wants, of course. However, at some point, you have to leave the nest. It seems to me that more and more people are refusing to do that.
I’m of the opinion that while God is our Father, he is also our Shepherd in the sense that he teaches us and guides us, but it is all ultimately up to us. Of course, “I can do all things through Christ, who strengthens me,” but, at the same time, “I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.”
It just seems to me that so many people are not taking responsibility, not bettering themselves or living up to their potential and God’s expectations.
I believe that after a certain point your relationship with God should make a change from that of a lost sheep or child to that of one who is striving to become more Godlike yourself. He then is no longer a crutch, but a supporter. A Helper, if you will.
What are your thoughts on this?