adoyi8: I like what you did there. You tried to use emotional appeal to cajole use into "wanting there to be a God". well as a matter of fact I wish there was an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent and omni-benevolent God but that's just what it is; A wish.
Are you now advising me to lie to myself that such a God exist despite knowing through my life experience and the experience of others that such a god do not exist?
The first nine paragraphs were basically appeal to reason, not emotional appeal.
How do you KNOW that this God you wish for isn't already a reality, but that you are yet to grasp the idea of his existence?
lovelygurl: We as curious beings tend to be on a search for an "interpretative pattern" that gives our lives a meaning, making faith somehow a natural trait human beings possess.
Faith according to Wikipedia: faith /feɪθ/Submit noun 1. complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
2. strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof.
Faith can be influenced and reinforced by your enviroment, which includes your family, teachers, friends etc. To put in a nutshell, everyone you're surrounded by.
However, we live in the 21st century and science, which has come a very long way is now capable of explaining some things that had before been unexplainable, resulting to God's contours/outlines getting increasingly blurred.
The more science is able to explain, the more people lose their faith and the more become atheists. This doesn't change the fact that there is still a lot science in unable to explain. Science in most cases is only capable of describing things rather than [b]explaining [/b]them.
Sometimes we find ourselves in a hopeless situation, where science or technology is unable to save or help us, for example when someone gets diagnosed with a deadly disease or someone dear to us in a coma state or a persistent vegetative state or even if that person happens to be US.
It is during times like this we tend to hold on to sth or someone like God (or as atheists will say say, a "sky daddy" ), who might still be able to save the day by miraculously healing the person.
Although, most people are guilty of these (including some atheists, who ask for a pastor on their deathbed), situations like this are very common in developing countries, where most times all people have is "hope".
The more developed a country is, the more its citizenns tend to see God as someone people needed in the past to explain the unexplainable, a person who is however becoming less relevant in a world where science and logic is now used to explain the world.
But how less relevant can he become?
Because despite all of these, there is still a large number of people in developed countries, who still confess to some sort of spiritual belief, such as a life-force or divine spirit that pervades nature and humanity leading to the questions:
1) Are you of the opinion that there'll be a time where reliigion becomes history?
2) Don't you think it is human nature to try to explain the complexity and unpredictability of the world by believing in sth. spiritual etc. ( even when there is none)?
Grade1 USA used Intel corei5 Brand name : HP Model : Pavilion 15 HDD : 1TB Ram 8gb Touchscreen 7th generation Processor Speed; 2.8ghz Screen size : 15.6inch Memory card slots : MMC. MS. MS pro. SD 3 USB Port DVD RW CD ROM Hdmi Bluetooth : yes HD Webcam yes Wireless network WiFi : yes Battery backup : 4hrs Microsoft package : windows 10 installed Body look : as clean as new Condition : working perfectly, great battery
Price is 150k
Free original charger Warranty on all our laptops Free delivery within Lagos only and it's pay on delivery
budaatum: It was disagreement with the Church's selling of indulgences that Martin Luther opposed, 9, and some will claim rightly too since the Church had no right selling tickets to heaven! Jesus too did exactly the same thing when he opposed the church of his day claiming they gave stones instead of bread
If it was just the disagreement with the selling of indulgences, Luther would not have been excommunicated. How much did his disagreement with selling of indulgences relate to his 95 thesis and subsequent alteration of the bible?
Luther caused a breakaway from Catholicism and the creation of Protestantism so too did Jesus cause the breakaway from Judaism and the creation of Christianity. I'm sure they both burn in hell for their disobedience to the church of their respective days.
I call apple and oranges on your comparison! Christianity essentially is Judaism fully expressed. Most Catholics who converted from Judaism would hardly tell say they converted to a new religion that had replaced Judaism. Rather, it was Judaism, but with the Messiah having come. For these type of converts, many facets of New Covenant worship evokes elements of the Old: features suth as the tabernacle, the ambo, and the altar made sense to them in a way that they may not for those who convert to Catholicism from non-Christian or Protestant Christian backgrounds. And the similarities didn’t end with liturgy. They didn’t see Catholicism’s doctrines as something foreign either. Rather, they saw the continuity, the inner logic, of Jesus’ teachings vis-a-vis the Old Testament. Considering that Jesus was a faithful Jew, this should really not be surprising.
Romans 3:31 Do we, then, nullify the Law by this faith? Certainly not! Instead, we uphold the Law. Luke 16:17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.
Isaiah 42:21 The LORD is well pleased for his righteousness' sake; he will magnify the law, and make it honourable.
Matthew 5:17-18 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."
All the same, you have convinced me to become Catholic, after all it's not like there's anywhere in the Bible they preach where it says fruits matter, and, in as much as I commit one sin, so why would the fact that the Church, its leaders at that, produce some rotten fruits, matter? Just remind me of the chapter and verse so that when anyone asks me about the rotten fruits of my newly joined sect I can tell them I am a member of the the "body of Christ" the Catholic Church that is the "custodian of his Word", the "pillar and foundation of Truth" and the "ONLY body instituted by Christ through which unadulterated Christianity" is taught, and I'm going to heaven because rotten fruits do not matter and they are going to hell, please.
And thanks for converting me to that "unadulterated Christianity", 9. Your time and effort has been appreciated.
I call straw man on the bolded. You simply aren't paying attention.
The Catholic Church may claim so, but you yourself admit and agree with me that "there are words outside the Catholic Church and outside Christianity even, all godly too" , and "a non believer can possibly get to heaven". And besides, Jesus never said anything whatsoever about any one particular church!
9inches: I understand where you are coming from, but the Holy Spirit does not sow confusion. And no, Christ did not give permission to forge one's own subjective interpretation. That's the reason he made his apostles (the early Church) the custodian of his Word and additionally promised them his Holy Spirit to guide them in the light of truth. The Church is the pillar and foundation of Truth. Truth is not guaranteed outside the Church (1 Tim 3:15). That's all I'm saying.
It was the sin of disobedience and PRIDE that separated Martin Luther from the Body of Christ, the Church.
Exactly! And Martin Luther is the reason there are now over 33,000 different denominations interpreting the bible differently whilst claiming the Holy Spirit (which we all agree does not sow confusion). The Body of Christ (the Church) is undivided. The Body of Christ is one, not 2, not 5, not 20 and definitely not 33,000.
Exactly! That's why Catholics don't leave the "average Joe Public" to interpret what "average Joe Public" thinks or feels the interpretation should mean.... The Church is authoritative custodian of the Word of God (including the bible), so you can be rest assured it remains uncorrupted until the end of time. You can't get such guarantee outside the Church.
9inches: Actually, you are not allowed to forge your own subjective interpretation of Christianity (or the bible) in the Catholic church. The bible is not confusing to the Church; the Church compiled the bible and was the ONLY body instituted by Christ through which unadulterated Christianity can be taught and learned.
So, yes! We already have our milk bottled for hundreds of centuries; and it comes with original seal of authenticity. Why selfishly replicate and risk corruption?
9inches: I agree with you. I think the fundamentalists are to blame for this perception of Christianity and the bible as bigoted.
9inches: We both agree on the bible is a fail-safe guarantee, except you haven't realized the bible came from "the Church". By virtue of me being part of "the Church", I have the privilege of a more holistic knowledge of the Word of God than the bible itself alone can offer you. This implies you are more at risk of misinterpreting the Word of God because you don't have any backup information.
I'm assuming you know that Timothy (ordained bishop of Ephesus by Paul) and Titus (ordained bishop of Crete by Paul) were two of Apostle Paul's companions and disciples (assistants). But have you heard about Irenaeus (bishop of Lyons) who was a student of Polycarp? And Polycarp (ordained bishop of Smyrna by Apostle John)? Have you heard anything they taught or wrote? Do you know any of the early Christians apart from the apostles, and what they believed, taught or wrote? Have you studied the church (Christian) history from the time of Christ as recorded in the bible to present day? Or did you just pick the bible without giving a good thought where it came from and how it came to you? These are the questions you should answer to yourself IF YOU ARE A TRUTH SEEKER. You are an adult, don't be afraid to challenge your beliefs with these vital questions. You have nothing to lose by researching them, but everything to gain in terms of knowledge. If you seek the Truth, you'll find it, right?
I live in the Church because I'm a part of it. The bible lives with me.
1. The Church is The Body of Christ - Rom 12:5; Col 1:24 2. Christ is the head of The Body (The Church) - Col 1:18 3. I'm an individual part of The Body (The Church) - 1 Cor 12:27; Rom 12:5 4. The Church is the pillar and foundation of Truth!!! - 1 Tim 3:15
Reflection:Are you a part of the Church according to 1 Corinthians 12:27 or are you independent (outside) of the Church like Martin Luther?
One thing I dislike about Christians is that you never get a full record of the symptoms before prescribing you own version of Christ. You assume everyone is poor but proclaim the good news to the lame, the blind, those who have leprosy, the deaf and the dead, when what they need is to receive sight, walk, be cleansed, hear, and be raised from the dead. Do you not understand what it means to give stones instead of bread? Did Christ not preach 'woe' to those who do this? One would think you think you should not cast your pearls in front of swine because your pearls are valuable, when the truth is that you should mind not to choke the poor swine with your pearls.
I wish I knew the specific person (s) you are talking about. But what does that have to do with the Church's teachings? Human beings are utterly flawed; no question about that. The sexual abuse scandal that has rocked the Church is a more recent testament to that. Like I said earlier, you have to distinguish between the Church's teachings from human failings. The Church will never fail; that's a guarantee by the Head of the Church himself (Christ).
Look, you can point fingers and call out Christians for their hypocrisy (Lord knows we deserve that a lot), but be wary, else you become guilty of the exact sin you are calling out. Don't bank your soul on individuals. I would be very foolishh of me to stop going to church just because my pastor was involved in one mess or the other. You get what I mean?
I am taking offence at you, 9, for calling me straw, when the truth is I "Exactly! Well captured, well done", your argument! If you could be thinking I am so straw when I'm not, then maybe it is not me who is straw here!
I point out your "straws" as well your "Exactly! Well captured[s]."
budaatum: It is in my opinion, subjectivity, that makes one 'hear' different things in different situations, and what makes the book the so called "living word of God". I see it like the mud that God breathed life into. If not read in the proper way it is just another book or dirty mud, but if read properly, it's like mud spat on by Jesus and rubbed in the eyes so one can see.
Crux of the matter: What's the "proper" way of reading the bible?
budaatum: Is your current argument not that one should be a catholic (your initial one being one should be a Christian), because they are the only church of Christ who can objectively teach the Bible, which is necessary because people need someone to teach them the bible because any individual understanding iscould be subjective and wrong?
Exactly! Well captured, well done.
And does a wrong understanding of the bible and Christ not lead one to hell?
Not really. God judges the heart (intent). Again, even a non believer can possibly get to heaven.
As to your "Life itself is a school. ...... you don't stop learning until you die", yes, I agree, and I don't see the point wasting that life learning about your one god in your one class in your one school. One must not live by bread alone, see, but by every word, and you would find, if you search, that there are words outside the Catholic Church and outside Christianity even, all godly too.
@bolded, Absolutely. No iota of doubt about that; every belief [system] has some good in it. It would be really hard to think of a belief system that does not have some good in it; at least I can't think of one.
Now get straight: the Catholic church claims that it teaches, governs, and sanctifies with the authority of Christ himself. Catholics believe that this gift of Church authority is one of the jewels that Christ has given to us as an aid to our salvation. He promised to remain present in his Church for all time, and to guide it through the presence of the Holy Spirit. The source and guarantee of this Church authority is Christ’s continuing presence in his Church - "Lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age" (Mt 28:20). The purpose of this authority is to give the Church the ability to teach without error about the essentials of salvation (Mt 16:18).
The scope of this authority concerns the official teachings of the Church on matters of faith, morals, and worship (liturgy and sacraments). We believe that because of Christ’s continued presence and guarantee, his Church cannot lead people astray with its official teachings (which are distinct from the individual failings and opinions of its members, priests, bishops, and Popes).
budaatum: That's not a reason to remain in the same class or the same school throughout one's life!
Life itself is a school. You go through different classes until you die. There's no graduation; you don't stop learning until you die.
You all claim your version is objective, 9. Even Tatime, a JW, would tell you their interpretation is objective and everyone else's is wrong, but just take your comment above. If you read your Bible and understood it, you'd not be repeating the "Thank you Lord that I am not like those tax collectors over there", error. Just goes to show you treat your sect as if it were a political party, "vote for us and you would enter heaven, vote for those other lot and you are going straight to hell". Not very Christlike in my subjective understanding, but I'm sure you'd claim I err, again.
@bolded, Your preconceived notion about catholics isn't letting you focus on the argument I'm making. Just to address your straw man, as a Catholic I believe I can go to hellfire and an atheist or a muslim can enter heaven. So, I don't know how your "tax collectors' straw man could be attributed to my argument.
I have read the whole bible multiple times and I know there is no way anyone could understand everything in it if "bible alone" is to be the rule of faith. Only Catholics claim the bible is NOT the only rule of faith which means we have other sources to put the seemingly confusing parts of the bible into context for better understanding.
I would like to see where the JW claims their version of christian interpretation is objective.
budaatum: Every interpretation of Christianity and the bible is subjective, 9. That's why its understanding has changed over time and why there's so many versions and interpretations. Everyone may think their interpretation is the correct one, but none of them can claim objectivity. Not even the Bible can be claimed to be objective since it is written from a subjective viewpoint.
So true for protestants, not true for the Catholic church. Protestantism is Subjective, Catholicism is Objective.
And no, I am not "peddling the ..... "Christ is against religion" argument" as you assume. I am not against religion myself, in as much as it means regularly attending a place to learn under a teacher who knows better. Or do you not know that religiously going to church every Sunday is what became every day school? What I am against is the idea that one must remain in the same class all through one's life. Surely there must be graduation day when one has learnt enough and abandons ones childish ways?
I do not preach, 9, since I am an atheist! You are asking me about my understanding and I'm telling you about it, I do not expect you to abandon your belief and follow mine! Any understanding I may have is solely for myself.
Also, Jesus gave the mandate to understand and go directly to the Father to every human being when he freed people from the church of his day. It is my opinion that one wastes the body and blood of Christ if one then goes to shackle oneself to a church Christ died to free one from.
When I said "you", I meant anyone with your type of subjectivist interpretation of Christianity and the bible.
Do you realize you are still peddling the already debunked "Christ is against religion" argument? Jesus was against folks teaching the wrong thing. He was a practicing Jew, goes to the synagogue often. Even when he said "destroy this temple", he followed it up with "I will rebuild it in 3 days."
There was a time when the Church sanctioned slavery, exploitation of women, and sold indulgences - tickets to get into the heaven, and I'm sure the Church at the time would claim it was led by the holy spirit, or by God. But the holy spirit is simply the human mind itself and understanding or misunderstanding is down to the individual.
For many centuries before the Pentateuch was written down it was memorised and passed down verbally from generation to generation. You might understand how different variations and versions could be remembered. Humans then eventually wrote the text down over many years by joining various versions and variations together to make a whole, and continously edited to fit the narrative desired at the time. That's why there are various contradictions in it, and also why it is the "Word of God". Sorting out the so called contradictions is like fertilising the mind. One can't help but grow through the process of trying to understand it.
My question was: 1. Is that incorrect? 2. Do you disagree with any part of the clip? 3. Is the Holy Spirit responsible for the contradicting interpretations in Christianity?
Answer the questions and then you can go ahead with the explanations.
I understand it to be talking about the host being the body of Christ. Is that incorrect? Barron admits Jesus was speaking metaphorically which I agree with, for Jesus did not cut off some of his flesh and give it to his disciples to eat!
Here is what he said in relation to it:
“The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them; and those who exercise authority over them call themselves Benefactors. But you are not to be like that. Instead, the greatest among you should be like the youngest, and the one who rules like the one who serves. For who is greater, the one who is at the table or the one who serves? Is it not the one who is at the table? But I am among you as one who serves.
"God ordains strength out of the mouth of babes and sucklings", see, "the one who rules like the one who serves".
The flesh and blood to me is the Word of God that life has been injected into. And by 'life injected into', I mean not just claiming "Lord! Lord!", but "doing my will". One can eat all the words one wants but if they do not become the flesh and blood in one, one worships in vain, 9.
Please be specific when you ask about videos you post so I know what part you specifically mean.
Is that incorrect? Do you disagree with any part of the clip? Is the Holy Spirit responsible for the contradicting interpretations in Christianity?
Christ never said any one particular church is his church or body, 9! It is the Pharisees who taught stupidly like that thinking they were the happy chosen few and everyone else was damned! Did Christ not say they will be replaced by stones if they do not do his will? Were the damned Gentiles not included on Christ's 'Church' in the end?
Jesus said “For no one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, for whoever is not against us is for us. Truly I tell you, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to the Messiah will certainly not lose their reward.
Essentially, I don't even have to be a believer not to talk of go to any one particular church. All I have to do is give you, who belongs to the Messiah, a cup of water and my reward is guaranteed. Even you acknowledge this fact by stating "buda is at risk of preaching heresy", despite knowing that buda actually qualifies as a heretic by all definitions.
There is a huge difference between religion and understanding what Christ taught, 9, and there's a difference in people's ability to understand. Christ pointed this out when he said "the blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is proclaimed to the poor".
Each receives according to their need and ability to receive, is the point. The poor after all do not need to be cured of ailments that they do not have.
You're still not catching on to my argument.
Just so you know, I believe anyone could be saved - catholics, non catholics, even atheists... So that takes care of your Pharisee Saducee straw man and trying to put words in my mouth.
My point is you stand a risk of preaching heretics by reading and interpreting the bible on your own without guidance from the Church who has the mandate to teach. Again, think about it, 33000+ denominations claiming the Holy Spirit but Holy Spirit does not set out confusion nor does it speak from both sides of the mouth.
Know that I appreciate the time, patience and consideration that you take to respond to me.
You are saying, or rather, what I hear from you is, "Lord, look! buda over there is not one of us yet he heals in your name"! And you fail to heed the parable where it says, "thank god I'm not like buda the tax collector". Remind me what happens to those who heed not these lesson please for they are errors I'd like to refrain from committing.
9, have you ever wondered why there are two creation of humans in Genesis? Do you know why there are four contradicting gospels? Have you wondered why Paul and James disagreed? And what the heck was that Jesus doing disregarding the Catholic Church of his day, the Pharisses and Sadducces, and claiming a direct phoneline to God the Father! Yet, here is you asking me to replace the direct line he linked me into and divert it to some priest in some church! Don't you know the difference between stones and life giving bread?
You see, even in the Bible, the disagreeing is obvious so how much less we humans who read it? And to be honest, it is my opinion that we are better off for the diversity in understanding, and God itself planned it would be so. Or why the heck would one read "so that it could be said that out of Egypt God called his son"?
The criteria to know which understanding is true is clearly given. Can you tell me what that criteria is please, 9?
@bolded; No, that's not what I'm saying at all. What I'm saying is "Lord, look! buda right here is one of us but he's at risk of preaching heresy having rejected Your Church, Your Body.
It's a book 9. Written in a language I understand. I don't need anyone to interpret it to me as you can very well see. God sent the Holy Spirit to assist so I should not be needing some Pharisaic priest to fill my head with nonsense.
Is your own understanding of the bible (with assistance of Holy Spirit) in line or contradict with this?
It's a book 9. Written in a language I understand. I don't need anyone to interpret it to me as you can very well see. God sent the Holy Spirit to assist so I should not be needing some Pharisaic priest to fill my head with nonsense.
When I want to learn about Christianity, I go to the Gospels of Christ and to the Spirit of God that is within because he advised me to do so and not go looking here and there!
Is that not what each of the 33,000 denominations do or claim to do - interpreting parts of the bible out of context? You think you can understand it all without being taught?
Jaysolu: There would be a very juicy story behind this Maybe she was caught cheating with bovi so he took all hus property nd left her and this followed anyone else hava theory??
Or maybe ah husbandry is sheeting on her profusely.
Do you mean the interpretation that makes works paramount? Then yes.
Christ gave two laws. Love your God and love your neighbour. That word 'love' means work, to me. I'll park the love God for now since same Christ said worry not about the Father in heaven whom one sees not, and the Priest and the Levite who did, he implied they had done wrong.
When I love my neighbour, I have to get out my bed in the morning (work) and go and ensure they are alright (more work). I have to concern myself with the state of my community - are the gutters full and breeding mosquitoes, is that pothole filled so the feeble don't trip, is the noise from my generator keeping people up at night, the person beaten by thieves I must take to the hospital, ensure good government and so on. Besides, God said "work in the garden" to Adam, and not, "just have faith". Even reading the Bible is work!
The doctrine of faith is misapplied, in my opinion. I believe that what is meant is "have faith that your labour will bear fruit". All the evidence I have seen suggests this to be true.
You're almost there. Would you now start looking into and paying attention to Catholic teachings/interpretations whenever you are looking for anything Christianity?
Christians come in all sorts, 9, as do Catholics and lots of many other denominations, so yes, I've heard it before, though I confess it's not the majority belief of Nigerian Christians who seem to believe they are saved by their faith so can sit on their asses despite James trumping Paul with the works he does with his.
Am I right to say this particular interpretation made the most sense (most rational) to you?
I never said I didn't understand. I'd even agree with the video somewhat since it supports a position I agree with if not for the 'belief'. It must have been hard for you to agree I guess, hence your belligerence.
Okay then... But does this Catholic interpretation sound like what you've been hearing from most Christians you interact with?
Religion / Re: Why Even Atheists Should Want There To Be A God by 9inches(m): 12:02pm On Feb 14, 2019 
But it's not odd for someone who deals with dimensions and numbers on the daily to bear such moniker.
- 1 Tim 3:15