genius rears it's head.RMF5630 said:
Done, believe what you want. I don't care. I am more interested in the guy who saw REM and eating toast.
true genius.
- kkm
scarce commodity 'round these here parts.
{ decomposing carcass }
Go Bears!
Losin' my religion
29,814 Views |
572 Replies |
Last: 1 yr ago by Sam Lowry
true genius.
- kkm
scarce commodity 'round these here parts.
{ decomposing carcass }
No we do not claim it. Wesley did not like it.Coke Bear said:Waco1947 said:
As an ordained elder in my church and we believe in Apostolic succession too.
According to several Methodist websites, they don't consider it a direct Bishop-to-Bishop succession as Catholics and Orthodox do, but rather a line of continuity.
Irrespective of that issue, do Methodists claim that the substance of the bread/juice(wine) is changed during their church service?
Waco1947
John did not say that. You infer from the "touch my hands' verses and Jesus on the beach eating after the resurrection. But a careful reading of those passages says that John had a much larger intent in mind. The writer of John is a good 70 years after Jesus death and not John is not the writer.JXL said:BaylorJacket said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Irrelevant to my question. Whatever it is, according to Christianity, was Jesus' literal death and resurrection the reason we can have it?BaylorJacket said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Are you seriously saying that Jesus' literal death and resurrection does not need to be true in order for us to have salvation? That it is just my "interpretation" that it does?BaylorJacket said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:What, exactly, wasn't true, and where was there no humility?Quote:
There is little truth...and certainly no humility in your comments .
Your interpretation of Salvation presented in the New Testament is simply that - an interpretation. I recommend not calling others heretics for not reading the Bible the same way you do.
What is your definition of salvation?
There are thousands of different sects of Christianity, whose views on Salvation can drastically change.
Depending on one's view on Atonement theory, a physical/bodily resurrection is not required for salvation.
John the Apostle, and Jesus himself, said that the Resurrection was physical and not just spiritual, but what would they know?
Waco1947
BusyTarpDuster2017 said:"it is not my faith in Jesus' bodily resurrection that has kept me as a Christian."BaylorJacket said:Yeah, I completely agree. It's interesting to listen to what draws a person towards a particular religion, and sect within that religion. I personally try to approach things from a faith, science, and art perspective, and it is not my faith in Jesus' bodily resurrection that has kept me as a Christian.RMF5630 said:Guy is stuck on discussing only Christian, SBC view. Any others and you are a non-Christian...BaylorJacket said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Irrelevant to my question. Whatever it is, according to Christianity, was Jesus' literal death and resurrection the reason we can have it?BaylorJacket said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Are you seriously saying that Jesus' literal death and resurrection does not need to be true in order for us to have salvation? That it is just my "interpretation" that it does?BaylorJacket said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:What, exactly, wasn't true, and where was there no humility?Quote:
There is little truth...and certainly no humility in your comments .
Your interpretation of Salvation presented in the New Testament is simply that - an interpretation. I recommend not calling others heretics for not reading the Bible the same way you do.
What is your definition of salvation?
There are thousands of different sects of Christianity, whose views on Salvation can drastically change.
Depending on one's view on Atonement theory, a physical/bodily resurrection is not required for salvation.
Even showing curiosity to explore why others believe as they do, is not enough. Sort of locked in one-track of discussion. Believe me I tried...
We should have the courage and determinate to maintain a state of resolute irresolution.
But the question is, is Jesus' resurrection literal, and if it weren't, would that change your beliefs regarding YOUR concept of salvation? The other guy said no. But if you believe we can have eternal life only because of Jesus' literal resurrection, doesn't the resurrection NOT being true affect that?
Christ said over and over believing is a stumbling block for many. For those that were his, the original 12 Apostles it seems as though belief in the resurrection is key to actual belief, if you don't believe that part, the belief is futile.Quote:
15 Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2 By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.
3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance[a]: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas,[b] and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.
9 For I am the least of the apostles and do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me was not without effect. No, I worked harder than all of themyet not I, but the grace of God that was with me. 11 Whether, then, it is I or they, this is what we preach, and this is what you believed.
The Resurrection of the Dead
12 But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. 15 More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. 19 If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.
Not Baptist? I will bet you're non-denominational who are really Baptists who soft pedal hell and drinking alcoholBusyTarpDuster2017 said:This comment makes no sense.RMF5630 said:Guy is stuck on discussing only Christian, SBC view. Any others and you are a non-Christian...BaylorJacket said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Irrelevant to my question. Whatever it is, according to Christianity, was Jesus' literal death and resurrection the reason we can have it?BaylorJacket said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Are you seriously saying that Jesus' literal death and resurrection does not need to be true in order for us to have salvation? That it is just my "interpretation" that it does?BaylorJacket said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:What, exactly, wasn't true, and where was there no humility?Quote:
There is little truth...and certainly no humility in your comments .
Your interpretation of Salvation presented in the New Testament is simply that - an interpretation. I recommend not calling others heretics for not reading the Bible the same way you do.
What is your definition of salvation?
There are thousands of different sects of Christianity, whose views on Salvation can drastically change.
Depending on one's view on Atonement theory, a physical/bodily resurrection is not required for salvation.
Even showing curiosity to explore why others believe as they do, is not enough. Sort of locked in one-track of discussion. Believe me I tried...
First of all, the discussion involved only the Christian view.....because that's the topic of the discussion, the Christian view - how the miracle of Jesus' resurrection is essential to the Christian faith and hope. So by staying focused on that, that deserves the criticism of "being stuck" on it or "locked in a one-track discussion" as if that's a fault?
Secondly, I'm not Baptist. Regardless, it doesn't even matter, because the view being expressed is the central belief of all of Christianity. Jesus' literal death and resurrection as the only means to our salvation (atonement + eternal life for those who want to be specific) isn't a narrow interpretation of a single Christian denomination. In fact, ANY other view that disagrees with this is NOT Christian, full stop. It's not Catholic, either.
And this view being expressed.....it's YOUR own view as a Catholic, isn't it? What, precisely, have I said that doesn't agree with your belief? The point of all this was to show that your claim that miracles don't matter to your beliefs is wrong, if you believe that the risen Jesus is essential to your faith.
Thirdly, this never had anything to do with "exploring why others believe the way they do". This specifically had to do with the inconsistency in YOUR belief, not anyone else's, nor with any curiosity about their beliefs whatsoever. Please re-read the thread if you have any doubts.
Finally, regarding your comment "believe me, I tried" in the context of only discussing Christian beliefs and not talking about others' beliefs and why they believe them - again, that had nothing to do with the point I was making, so why you feel I failed in some way by not talking about something that had nothing to do with my point, is beyond me.
Waco1947
Why does the Christian origin story in Jesu Christ take precedence over other religions?
Waco1947
Yep. I Corinthians 15 was what I quoted in the very beginning of all this:
https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/107574/replies/2742890
https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/107574/replies/2742890
Methodists, like Baptists, believe it is symbolic.Waco1947 said:As an ordained elder in my church and we believe in Apostolic succession too.Coke Bear said:My apologies.Waco1947 said:
Please do not tell me what Methodists believe. You may represent your faith but not mine.I'm pretty sure wine was present at the last supper.Waco1947 said:
Grape juice/wine are neither one scriptural.Fair enough, but is the substance of the juice/wine and wafer changed into anything while the accidents remain the same? If so, what and by what authority?Waco1947 said:
Regardless of the juice we, Methodists, take it for the nourishment of souls and participation of the suffering and dying of Christ.
Salute the Marines - Joe Biden
Waco1947 said:John did not say that. You infer from the "touch my hands' verses and Jesus on the beach eating after the resurrection. But a careful reading of those passages says that John had a much larger intent in mind. The writer of John is a good 70 years after Jesus death and not John is not the writer.JXL said:BaylorJacket said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Irrelevant to my question. Whatever it is, according to Christianity, was Jesus' literal death and resurrection the reason we can have it?BaylorJacket said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Are you seriously saying that Jesus' literal death and resurrection does not need to be true in order for us to have salvation? That it is just my "interpretation" that it does?BaylorJacket said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:What, exactly, wasn't true, and where was there no humility?Quote:
There is little truth...and certainly no humility in your comments .
Your interpretation of Salvation presented in the New Testament is simply that - an interpretation. I recommend not calling others heretics for not reading the Bible the same way you do.
What is your definition of salvation?
There are thousands of different sects of Christianity, whose views on Salvation can drastically change.
Depending on one's view on Atonement theory, a physical/bodily resurrection is not required for salvation.
John the Apostle, and Jesus himself, said that the Resurrection was physical and not just spiritual, but what would they know?
You might check 1 John 4:2-3. Here it is, from Young's Literal Translation:
in this know ye the Spirit of God; every spirit that doth confess Jesus Christ in the flesh having come, of God it is, 3 and every spirit that doth not confess Jesus Christ in the flesh having come, of God it is not; and this is that of the antichrist, which ye heard that it doth come, and now in the world it is already.
Forest for the win...still again .Forest Bueller_bf said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:"it is not my faith in Jesus' bodily resurrection that has kept me as a Christian."BaylorJacket said:Yeah, I completely agree. It's interesting to listen to what draws a person towards a particular religion, and sect within that religion. I personally try to approach things from a faith, science, and art perspective, and it is not my faith in Jesus' bodily resurrection that has kept me as a Christian.RMF5630 said:Guy is stuck on discussing only Christian, SBC view. Any others and you are a non-Christian...BaylorJacket said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Irrelevant to my question. Whatever it is, according to Christianity, was Jesus' literal death and resurrection the reason we can have it?BaylorJacket said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Are you seriously saying that Jesus' literal death and resurrection does not need to be true in order for us to have salvation? That it is just my "interpretation" that it does?BaylorJacket said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:What, exactly, wasn't true, and where was there no humility?Quote:
There is little truth...and certainly no humility in your comments .
Your interpretation of Salvation presented in the New Testament is simply that - an interpretation. I recommend not calling others heretics for not reading the Bible the same way you do.
What is your definition of salvation?
There are thousands of different sects of Christianity, whose views on Salvation can drastically change.
Depending on one's view on Atonement theory, a physical/bodily resurrection is not required for salvation.
Even showing curiosity to explore why others believe as they do, is not enough. Sort of locked in one-track of discussion. Believe me I tried...
We should have the courage and determinate to maintain a state of resolute irresolution.
But the question is, is Jesus' resurrection literal, and if it weren't, would that change your beliefs regarding YOUR concept of salvation? The other guy said no. But if you believe we can have eternal life only because of Jesus' literal resurrection, doesn't the resurrection NOT being true affect that?Christ said over and over believing is a stumbling block for many. For those that were his, the original 12 Apostles it seems as though belief in the resurrection is key to actual belief, if you don't believe that part, the belief is futile.Quote:
15 Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2 By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.
3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance[a]: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas,[b] and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.
9 For I am the least of the apostles and do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me was not without effect. No, I worked harder than all of themyet not I, but the grace of God that was with me. 11 Whether, then, it is I or they, this is what we preach, and this is what you believed.
The Resurrection of the Dead
12 But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. 15 More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. 19 If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.
+ 1
Yet, this was exactly my point as well, and I even quoted the same scripture. But you told me there was "little truth" in what I was saying. Go figure....
BusyTarpDuster2017 said:
Yet, this was exactly my point as well, and I even quoted the same scripture. But you told me there was "little truth" in what I was saying. Go figure....
There is a not so subtle difference.
Forest makes sense.
And I invited you to explain, to which you were unable.Canada2017 said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:
Yet, this was exactly my point as well, and I even quoted the same scripture. But you told me there was "little truth" in what I was saying. Go figure....
There is a not so subtle difference.
Forest makes sense...always .
I think the not so subtle difference is your tribal bias.
chuckleBusyTarpDuster2017 said:And I invited you to explain, to which you were unable.Canada2017 said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:
Yet, this was exactly my point as well, and I even quoted the same scripture. But you told me there was "little truth" in what I was saying. Go figure....
There is a not so subtle difference.
Forest makes sense...always .
I think the not so subtle difference is your tribal bias.
' tribal bias '
Perfect example why you aren't worth a moment of serious discussion .
You make a lot of good comments in this forum, much that I agree with.Canada2017 said:chuckleBusyTarpDuster2017 said:And I invited you to explain, to which you were unable.Canada2017 said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:
Yet, this was exactly my point as well, and I even quoted the same scripture. But you told me there was "little truth" in what I was saying. Go figure....
There is a not so subtle difference.
Forest makes sense...always .
I think the not so subtle difference is your tribal bias.
' tribal bias '
Perfect example why you aren't worth a moment of serious discussion .
Rarely you make a point which you are unable to defend or support.
Even rarer are the times you resort to quash level tactics by using insult to hide that you can't.
This is one of them.
Seriously, don't understand what you find so untrue about anything I said, or your animosity towards me. Since you are avoiding giving an explanation, tribal bias is as good a theory as any.
Explaining that faith is required to actually be a Christian will always anger those who lack faith yet still desire the label of Christian.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:You make a lot of good comments in this forum, much that I agree with.Canada2017 said:chuckleBusyTarpDuster2017 said:And I invited you to explain, to which you were unable.Canada2017 said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:
Yet, this was exactly my point as well, and I even quoted the same scripture. But you told me there was "little truth" in what I was saying. Go figure....
There is a not so subtle difference.
Forest makes sense...always .
I think the not so subtle difference is your tribal bias.
' tribal bias '
Perfect example why you aren't worth a moment of serious discussion .
Rarely you make a point which you are unable to defend or support.
Even rarer are the times you resort to quash level tactics by using insult to hide that you can't.
This is one of them.
Seriously, don't understand what you find so untrue about anything I said, or your animosity towards me. Since you are avoiding giving an explanation, tribal bias is as good a theory as any.
So Pelosi won't get to "take communion" from her bishop in her Catholic church? That worship event has got nothing to do with her salvation or lack thereof. Check your heart and soul first. Then, Martin Luther says "Welcome to a lot of good company".
LOL !Wangchung said:Explaining that faith is required to actually be a Christian will always anger those who lack faith yet still desire the label of Christian.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:You make a lot of good comments in this forum, much that I agree with.Canada2017 said:chuckleBusyTarpDuster2017 said:And I invited you to explain, to which you were unable.Canada2017 said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:
Yet, this was exactly my point as well, and I even quoted the same scripture. But you told me there was "little truth" in what I was saying. Go figure....
There is a not so subtle difference.
Forest makes sense...always .
I think the not so subtle difference is your tribal bias.
' tribal bias '
Perfect example why you aren't worth a moment of serious discussion .
Rarely you make a point which you are unable to defend or support.
Even rarer are the times you resort to quash level tactics by using insult to hide that you can't.
This is one of them.
Seriously, don't understand what you find so untrue about anything I said, or your animosity towards me. Since you are avoiding giving an explanation, tribal bias is as good a theory as any.
Gotta luv the internet .
As if Martin Luther was any less corrupt...drahthaar said:
So Pelosi won't get to "take communion" from her bishop in her Catholic church? That worship event has got nothing to do with her salvation or lack thereof. Check your heart and soul first. Then, Martin Luther says "Welcome to a lot of good company".
Yep, very well stated.Wangchung said:Explaining that faith is required to actually be a Christian will always anger those who lack faith yet still desire the label of Christian.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:You make a lot of good comments in this forum, much that I agree with.Canada2017 said:chuckleBusyTarpDuster2017 said:And I invited you to explain, to which you were unable.Canada2017 said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:
Yet, this was exactly my point as well, and I even quoted the same scripture. But you told me there was "little truth" in what I was saying. Go figure....
There is a not so subtle difference.
Forest makes sense...always .
I think the not so subtle difference is your tribal bias.
' tribal bias '
Perfect example why you aren't worth a moment of serious discussion .
Rarely you make a point which you are unable to defend or support.
Even rarer are the times you resort to quash level tactics by using insult to hide that you can't.
This is one of them.
Seriously, don't understand what you find so untrue about anything I said, or your animosity towards me. Since you are avoiding giving an explanation, tribal bias is as good a theory as any.
There's true faith, and there's religiosity. If the resurrection were not literally true, and yet that would not change your beliefs or the way you worship, then I'm inclined to believe you are all about the latter, and none of the former.
Of course Jesus came in the flesh.JXL said:Waco1947 said:John did not say that. You infer from the "touch my hands' verses and Jesus on the beach eating after the resurrection. But a careful reading of those passages says that John had a much larger intent in mind. The writer of John is a good 70 years after Jesus death and not John is not the writer.JXL said:BaylorJacket said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Irrelevant to my question. Whatever it is, according to Christianity, was Jesus' literal death and resurrection the reason we can have it?BaylorJacket said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Are you seriously saying that Jesus' literal death and resurrection does not need to be true in order for us to have salvation? That it is just my "interpretation" that it does?BaylorJacket said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:What, exactly, wasn't true, and where was there no humility?Quote:
There is little truth...and certainly no humility in your comments .
Your interpretation of Salvation presented in the New Testament is simply that - an interpretation. I recommend not calling others heretics for not reading the Bible the same way you do.
What is your definition of salvation?
There are thousands of different sects of Christianity, whose views on Salvation can drastically change.
Depending on one's view on Atonement theory, a physical/bodily resurrection is not required for salvation.
John the Apostle, and Jesus himself, said that the Resurrection was physical and not just spiritual, but what would they know?
You might check 1 John 4:2-3. Here it is, from Young's Literal Translation:
in this know ye the Spirit of God; every spirit that doth confess Jesus Christ in the flesh having come, of God it is, 3 and every spirit that doth not confess Jesus Christ in the flesh having come, of God it is not; and this is that of the antichrist, which ye heard that it doth come, and now in the world it is already.
Waco1947
Waco1947 said:Of course Jesus came in the flesh.JXL said:Waco1947 said:John did not say that. You infer from the "touch my hands' verses and Jesus on the beach eating after the resurrection. But a careful reading of those passages says that John had a much larger intent in mind. The writer of John is a good 70 years after Jesus death and not John is not the writer.JXL said:BaylorJacket said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Irrelevant to my question. Whatever it is, according to Christianity, was Jesus' literal death and resurrection the reason we can have it?BaylorJacket said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Are you seriously saying that Jesus' literal death and resurrection does not need to be true in order for us to have salvation? That it is just my "interpretation" that it does?BaylorJacket said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:What, exactly, wasn't true, and where was there no humility?Quote:
There is little truth...and certainly no humility in your comments .
Your interpretation of Salvation presented in the New Testament is simply that - an interpretation. I recommend not calling others heretics for not reading the Bible the same way you do.
What is your definition of salvation?
There are thousands of different sects of Christianity, whose views on Salvation can drastically change.
Depending on one's view on Atonement theory, a physical/bodily resurrection is not required for salvation.
John the Apostle, and Jesus himself, said that the Resurrection was physical and not just spiritual, but what would they know?
You might check 1 John 4:2-3. Here it is, from Young's Literal Translation:
in this know ye the Spirit of God; every spirit that doth confess Jesus Christ in the flesh having come, of God it is, 3 and every spirit that doth not confess Jesus Christ in the flesh having come, of God it is not; and this is that of the antichrist, which ye heard that it doth come, and now in the world it is already.
The passage is talking about the Resurrection, not the Incarnation.
The resurrection shouldn't matter. Jesus was supposed to be the perfect unqualified sacrifice for All sins to be forgiven. If he had to be resurrected, then he wouldn't be the perfect sacrifice would he? You could just continue to sacrifice a chicken or goat and all would be good.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:It being a "what if" discussion doesn't affect what I said.RMF5630 said:It was a philosophical "what if" discussion. You don't have academic discussions on subjects that allow you to stretch your thought processes? Why does every post have to be a Manifesto with you?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Yeah, you know, salvation - the whole point of Jesus? Of Christianity? What I've been talking about this whole time??RMF5630 said:That is an interesting way to put it. I would have to defer to the message. What he said, the scriptures/prophecies and the second part of the equation, for Catholics anyway, is how I live my life.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:That wasn't my question - would your belief about the state of OUR SALVATION change if the resurrection wasn't true?RMF5630 said:Yes, I did.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:You didn't answer my question.RMF5630 said:And if you learned it didn't, it was a parable. Remember, this is a philosophical discussion, not an attack Could you still believe that God sent his son with the same message and had the same impact on the world? Would it change how and what you worshiped?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:So, if you believe a literal resurrection was necessary for salvation, then IF the resurrection isn't true, how would that NOT change your belief about salvation?RMF5630 said:The resurrection offers that sinful humans can be reconciled to God and thereby are offered salvation. Catholics, including me, believe in the resurrection of Jesus. None of that was what the conversation was about. The conversation was a "what if" and how it impacts you. But, you seem stuck on three words out of 8 pages. What it matters to you, I have no idea. We are not going to agree if this conversation is going where I expect.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Okay, let's be clear. Do you believe that our salvation is only possible through the actual, literal death and resurrection of Jesus?RMF5630 said:You took one line of an 8 page discussion on the Bible and a question a Moslem asked me 25 years ago and turned it into a faith statement. If you would read the other 10 or so posts you would see the context of the discussion was does the Bible HAVE to be literal. Obviously, you believe so. I do not, as it does not impact the way I live my life. I am done with this.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:It has nothing to do with what I believe. If it is true that your beliefs do not require the resurrection of Jesus to actually have happened, then it is definitional/logically correct to say your beliefs aren't Christian. Cursing doesn't change that fact.RMF5630 said:Believe what you will. I don't give a ***** Whether you think I am Christian or not is irrelevant. Direct enough?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:
Well, no, you said exactly that: "Some facts are documrntable[sic], there was a Census. Pilate existed. Etc... But some also seem to be parables or hyperbole, such as walking on water, calming the storm, fisher of man, even resurrection". Was this in error?
Also, it would be correct to say that if your beliefs don't require the resurrection of Jesus to actually have happened, then your beliefs are definitely not Christian.
I'm not asking you to give a **** about what I believe. You should give a **** about what is truth, though.
If it would change your belief, then your belief system actually does require a literal miracle. The miracle isn't "cementing" the belief as you suggested, it is foundational to it. It can't exist without it. That's my point.
The basis of the question was that the Koran is very logical, you can find and follow quite easily. My Moslem friend used this to show that it was superior to the Bible. Why? Because the Bible required believe in supernatural events. Events that could not be proved and a lot that went against what we know from science. After much thought, my answer was NO. It would not change what I believe, the message Christ has and the structure of the Church for worship and the impact his message had on the world would be enough to stay where I am.
Does that make sense? It is not an argument over what I believe, it is a "what if" from a Moslem with a logical Koran under his arm. Would you abandon Christ's message if the miracles did not take place?
"After much thought, my answer was NO. It would not change what I believe, that God sent his son, the message Christ has and the structure of the Church for worship and the impact his message had on the world would be enough to stay where I am."
If I found out it was not true, it would not change a thing I do. I would not go running to the Koran. I would not abandon the believe in God. I would not go looking for a new moral code.
The question was asked by a Moslem to make his religion more attractive, get it? You keep coming back to fundamental arguments of the Christian Faith.
By your response to all this, I have to believe you would walk away and look for something else.
You did say you believe salvation is possible only through the resurrected Jesus, right? So if he really didn't resurrect, how does that not change your belief about the state of our salvation?
The one fact that is inescapable is that he, his message and his followers changed the world. OldBear brought up an interesting point that people died not for his word, but for the believe he rose again. Which plays into my point of changing the world.
I do not think I would defer to Islam which is where my buddy was trying to lead me. If I was forced to look at another religion, I think I would go back to Judaism since that was the original. Interesting thought process, when thought about in terms of salvation... Maybe tequila! : )
Yikes. It's alarming that you didn't understand the implication of there being no miracles on your Christian beliefs right away.
My point was precisely that within this "what if" discussion, you didn't stretch your thought process to realize how having no miracles actually destroys the central Christian belief and hope; and on top of that, you were unable to grasp it even as I was repeatedly pointing it out to you in our back and forth. It's just my humble opinion, and I'm not saying you aren't a Christian, but this kinda raises red flags. Just telling you the truth.
You are gonna get yourself harassed for weeks if you put that out there!TexasScientist said:The resurrection shouldn't matter. Jesus was supposed to be the perfect unqualified sacrifice for All sins to be forgiven. If he had to be resurrected, then he wouldn't be the perfect sacrifice would he? You could just continue to sacrifice a chicken or goat and all would be good.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:It being a "what if" discussion doesn't affect what I said.RMF5630 said:It was a philosophical "what if" discussion. You don't have academic discussions on subjects that allow you to stretch your thought processes? Why does every post have to be a Manifesto with you?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Yeah, you know, salvation - the whole point of Jesus? Of Christianity? What I've been talking about this whole time??RMF5630 said:That is an interesting way to put it. I would have to defer to the message. What he said, the scriptures/prophecies and the second part of the equation, for Catholics anyway, is how I live my life.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:That wasn't my question - would your belief about the state of OUR SALVATION change if the resurrection wasn't true?RMF5630 said:Yes, I did.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:You didn't answer my question.RMF5630 said:And if you learned it didn't, it was a parable. Remember, this is a philosophical discussion, not an attack Could you still believe that God sent his son with the same message and had the same impact on the world? Would it change how and what you worshiped?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:So, if you believe a literal resurrection was necessary for salvation, then IF the resurrection isn't true, how would that NOT change your belief about salvation?RMF5630 said:The resurrection offers that sinful humans can be reconciled to God and thereby are offered salvation. Catholics, including me, believe in the resurrection of Jesus. None of that was what the conversation was about. The conversation was a "what if" and how it impacts you. But, you seem stuck on three words out of 8 pages. What it matters to you, I have no idea. We are not going to agree if this conversation is going where I expect.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Okay, let's be clear. Do you believe that our salvation is only possible through the actual, literal death and resurrection of Jesus?RMF5630 said:You took one line of an 8 page discussion on the Bible and a question a Moslem asked me 25 years ago and turned it into a faith statement. If you would read the other 10 or so posts you would see the context of the discussion was does the Bible HAVE to be literal. Obviously, you believe so. I do not, as it does not impact the way I live my life. I am done with this.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:It has nothing to do with what I believe. If it is true that your beliefs do not require the resurrection of Jesus to actually have happened, then it is definitional/logically correct to say your beliefs aren't Christian. Cursing doesn't change that fact.RMF5630 said:Believe what you will. I don't give a ***** Whether you think I am Christian or not is irrelevant. Direct enough?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:
Well, no, you said exactly that: "Some facts are documrntable[sic], there was a Census. Pilate existed. Etc... But some also seem to be parables or hyperbole, such as walking on water, calming the storm, fisher of man, even resurrection". Was this in error?
Also, it would be correct to say that if your beliefs don't require the resurrection of Jesus to actually have happened, then your beliefs are definitely not Christian.
I'm not asking you to give a **** about what I believe. You should give a **** about what is truth, though.
If it would change your belief, then your belief system actually does require a literal miracle. The miracle isn't "cementing" the belief as you suggested, it is foundational to it. It can't exist without it. That's my point.
The basis of the question was that the Koran is very logical, you can find and follow quite easily. My Moslem friend used this to show that it was superior to the Bible. Why? Because the Bible required believe in supernatural events. Events that could not be proved and a lot that went against what we know from science. After much thought, my answer was NO. It would not change what I believe, the message Christ has and the structure of the Church for worship and the impact his message had on the world would be enough to stay where I am.
Does that make sense? It is not an argument over what I believe, it is a "what if" from a Moslem with a logical Koran under his arm. Would you abandon Christ's message if the miracles did not take place?
"After much thought, my answer was NO. It would not change what I believe, that God sent his son, the message Christ has and the structure of the Church for worship and the impact his message had on the world would be enough to stay where I am."
If I found out it was not true, it would not change a thing I do. I would not go running to the Koran. I would not abandon the believe in God. I would not go looking for a new moral code.
The question was asked by a Moslem to make his religion more attractive, get it? You keep coming back to fundamental arguments of the Christian Faith.
By your response to all this, I have to believe you would walk away and look for something else.
You did say you believe salvation is possible only through the resurrected Jesus, right? So if he really didn't resurrect, how does that not change your belief about the state of our salvation?
The one fact that is inescapable is that he, his message and his followers changed the world. OldBear brought up an interesting point that people died not for his word, but for the believe he rose again. Which plays into my point of changing the world.
I do not think I would defer to Islam which is where my buddy was trying to lead me. If I was forced to look at another religion, I think I would go back to Judaism since that was the original. Interesting thought process, when thought about in terms of salvation... Maybe tequila! : )
Yikes. It's alarming that you didn't understand the implication of there being no miracles on your Christian beliefs right away.
My point was precisely that within this "what if" discussion, you didn't stretch your thought process to realize how having no miracles actually destroys the central Christian belief and hope; and on top of that, you were unable to grasp it even as I was repeatedly pointing it out to you in our back and forth. It's just my humble opinion, and I'm not saying you aren't a Christian, but this kinda raises red flags. Just telling you the truth.
Nah, just corrected by people who understand Christianity.
And it starts... : )Wangchung said:
Nah, just corrected by people who understand Christianity.
chuckleRMF5630 said:You are gonna get yourself harassed for weeks if you put that out there!TexasScientist said:The resurrection shouldn't matter. Jesus was supposed to be the perfect unqualified sacrifice for All sins to be forgiven. If he had to be resurrected, then he wouldn't be the perfect sacrifice would he? You could just continue to sacrifice a chicken or goat and all would be good.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:It being a "what if" discussion doesn't affect what I said.RMF5630 said:It was a philosophical "what if" discussion. You don't have academic discussions on subjects that allow you to stretch your thought processes? Why does every post have to be a Manifesto with you?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Yeah, you know, salvation - the whole point of Jesus? Of Christianity? What I've been talking about this whole time??RMF5630 said:That is an interesting way to put it. I would have to defer to the message. What he said, the scriptures/prophecies and the second part of the equation, for Catholics anyway, is how I live my life.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:That wasn't my question - would your belief about the state of OUR SALVATION change if the resurrection wasn't true?RMF5630 said:Yes, I did.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:You didn't answer my question.RMF5630 said:And if you learned it didn't, it was a parable. Remember, this is a philosophical discussion, not an attack Could you still believe that God sent his son with the same message and had the same impact on the world? Would it change how and what you worshiped?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:So, if you believe a literal resurrection was necessary for salvation, then IF the resurrection isn't true, how would that NOT change your belief about salvation?RMF5630 said:The resurrection offers that sinful humans can be reconciled to God and thereby are offered salvation. Catholics, including me, believe in the resurrection of Jesus. None of that was what the conversation was about. The conversation was a "what if" and how it impacts you. But, you seem stuck on three words out of 8 pages. What it matters to you, I have no idea. We are not going to agree if this conversation is going where I expect.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Okay, let's be clear. Do you believe that our salvation is only possible through the actual, literal death and resurrection of Jesus?RMF5630 said:You took one line of an 8 page discussion on the Bible and a question a Moslem asked me 25 years ago and turned it into a faith statement. If you would read the other 10 or so posts you would see the context of the discussion was does the Bible HAVE to be literal. Obviously, you believe so. I do not, as it does not impact the way I live my life. I am done with this.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:It has nothing to do with what I believe. If it is true that your beliefs do not require the resurrection of Jesus to actually have happened, then it is definitional/logically correct to say your beliefs aren't Christian. Cursing doesn't change that fact.RMF5630 said:Believe what you will. I don't give a ***** Whether you think I am Christian or not is irrelevant. Direct enough?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:
Well, no, you said exactly that: "Some facts are documrntable[sic], there was a Census. Pilate existed. Etc... But some also seem to be parables or hyperbole, such as walking on water, calming the storm, fisher of man, even resurrection". Was this in error?
Also, it would be correct to say that if your beliefs don't require the resurrection of Jesus to actually have happened, then your beliefs are definitely not Christian.
I'm not asking you to give a **** about what I believe. You should give a **** about what is truth, though.
If it would change your belief, then your belief system actually does require a literal miracle. The miracle isn't "cementing" the belief as you suggested, it is foundational to it. It can't exist without it. That's my point.
The basis of the question was that the Koran is very logical, you can find and follow quite easily. My Moslem friend used this to show that it was superior to the Bible. Why? Because the Bible required believe in supernatural events. Events that could not be proved and a lot that went against what we know from science. After much thought, my answer was NO. It would not change what I believe, the message Christ has and the structure of the Church for worship and the impact his message had on the world would be enough to stay where I am.
Does that make sense? It is not an argument over what I believe, it is a "what if" from a Moslem with a logical Koran under his arm. Would you abandon Christ's message if the miracles did not take place?
"After much thought, my answer was NO. It would not change what I believe, that God sent his son, the message Christ has and the structure of the Church for worship and the impact his message had on the world would be enough to stay where I am."
If I found out it was not true, it would not change a thing I do. I would not go running to the Koran. I would not abandon the believe in God. I would not go looking for a new moral code.
The question was asked by a Moslem to make his religion more attractive, get it? You keep coming back to fundamental arguments of the Christian Faith.
By your response to all this, I have to believe you would walk away and look for something else.
You did say you believe salvation is possible only through the resurrected Jesus, right? So if he really didn't resurrect, how does that not change your belief about the state of our salvation?
The one fact that is inescapable is that he, his message and his followers changed the world. OldBear brought up an interesting point that people died not for his word, but for the believe he rose again. Which plays into my point of changing the world.
I do not think I would defer to Islam which is where my buddy was trying to lead me. If I was forced to look at another religion, I think I would go back to Judaism since that was the original. Interesting thought process, when thought about in terms of salvation... Maybe tequila! : )
Yikes. It's alarming that you didn't understand the implication of there being no miracles on your Christian beliefs right away.
My point was precisely that within this "what if" discussion, you didn't stretch your thought process to realize how having no miracles actually destroys the central Christian belief and hope; and on top of that, you were unable to grasp it even as I was repeatedly pointing it out to you in our back and forth. It's just my humble opinion, and I'm not saying you aren't a Christian, but this kinda raises red flags. Just telling you the truth.
TS has been attacking Christians and Christianity for several years . He thoroughly enjoys the attention .
I'm used to harassment on here.RMF5630 said:You are gonna get yourself harassed for weeks if you put that out there!TexasScientist said:The resurrection shouldn't matter. Jesus was supposed to be the perfect unqualified sacrifice for All sins to be forgiven. If he had to be resurrected, then he wouldn't be the perfect sacrifice would he? You could just continue to sacrifice a chicken or goat and all would be good.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:It being a "what if" discussion doesn't affect what I said.RMF5630 said:It was a philosophical "what if" discussion. You don't have academic discussions on subjects that allow you to stretch your thought processes? Why does every post have to be a Manifesto with you?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Yeah, you know, salvation - the whole point of Jesus? Of Christianity? What I've been talking about this whole time??RMF5630 said:That is an interesting way to put it. I would have to defer to the message. What he said, the scriptures/prophecies and the second part of the equation, for Catholics anyway, is how I live my life.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:That wasn't my question - would your belief about the state of OUR SALVATION change if the resurrection wasn't true?RMF5630 said:Yes, I did.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:You didn't answer my question.RMF5630 said:And if you learned it didn't, it was a parable. Remember, this is a philosophical discussion, not an attack Could you still believe that God sent his son with the same message and had the same impact on the world? Would it change how and what you worshiped?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:So, if you believe a literal resurrection was necessary for salvation, then IF the resurrection isn't true, how would that NOT change your belief about salvation?RMF5630 said:The resurrection offers that sinful humans can be reconciled to God and thereby are offered salvation. Catholics, including me, believe in the resurrection of Jesus. None of that was what the conversation was about. The conversation was a "what if" and how it impacts you. But, you seem stuck on three words out of 8 pages. What it matters to you, I have no idea. We are not going to agree if this conversation is going where I expect.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Okay, let's be clear. Do you believe that our salvation is only possible through the actual, literal death and resurrection of Jesus?RMF5630 said:You took one line of an 8 page discussion on the Bible and a question a Moslem asked me 25 years ago and turned it into a faith statement. If you would read the other 10 or so posts you would see the context of the discussion was does the Bible HAVE to be literal. Obviously, you believe so. I do not, as it does not impact the way I live my life. I am done with this.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:It has nothing to do with what I believe. If it is true that your beliefs do not require the resurrection of Jesus to actually have happened, then it is definitional/logically correct to say your beliefs aren't Christian. Cursing doesn't change that fact.RMF5630 said:Believe what you will. I don't give a ***** Whether you think I am Christian or not is irrelevant. Direct enough?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:
Well, no, you said exactly that: "Some facts are documrntable[sic], there was a Census. Pilate existed. Etc... But some also seem to be parables or hyperbole, such as walking on water, calming the storm, fisher of man, even resurrection". Was this in error?
Also, it would be correct to say that if your beliefs don't require the resurrection of Jesus to actually have happened, then your beliefs are definitely not Christian.
I'm not asking you to give a **** about what I believe. You should give a **** about what is truth, though.
If it would change your belief, then your belief system actually does require a literal miracle. The miracle isn't "cementing" the belief as you suggested, it is foundational to it. It can't exist without it. That's my point.
The basis of the question was that the Koran is very logical, you can find and follow quite easily. My Moslem friend used this to show that it was superior to the Bible. Why? Because the Bible required believe in supernatural events. Events that could not be proved and a lot that went against what we know from science. After much thought, my answer was NO. It would not change what I believe, the message Christ has and the structure of the Church for worship and the impact his message had on the world would be enough to stay where I am.
Does that make sense? It is not an argument over what I believe, it is a "what if" from a Moslem with a logical Koran under his arm. Would you abandon Christ's message if the miracles did not take place?
"After much thought, my answer was NO. It would not change what I believe, that God sent his son, the message Christ has and the structure of the Church for worship and the impact his message had on the world would be enough to stay where I am."
If I found out it was not true, it would not change a thing I do. I would not go running to the Koran. I would not abandon the believe in God. I would not go looking for a new moral code.
The question was asked by a Moslem to make his religion more attractive, get it? You keep coming back to fundamental arguments of the Christian Faith.
By your response to all this, I have to believe you would walk away and look for something else.
You did say you believe salvation is possible only through the resurrected Jesus, right? So if he really didn't resurrect, how does that not change your belief about the state of our salvation?
The one fact that is inescapable is that he, his message and his followers changed the world. OldBear brought up an interesting point that people died not for his word, but for the believe he rose again. Which plays into my point of changing the world.
I do not think I would defer to Islam which is where my buddy was trying to lead me. If I was forced to look at another religion, I think I would go back to Judaism since that was the original. Interesting thought process, when thought about in terms of salvation... Maybe tequila! : )
Yikes. It's alarming that you didn't understand the implication of there being no miracles on your Christian beliefs right away.
My point was precisely that within this "what if" discussion, you didn't stretch your thought process to realize how having no miracles actually destroys the central Christian belief and hope; and on top of that, you were unable to grasp it even as I was repeatedly pointing it out to you in our back and forth. It's just my humble opinion, and I'm not saying you aren't a Christian, but this kinda raises red flags. Just telling you the truth.
chuckleTexasScientist said:I'm used to harassment on here.RMF5630 said:You are gonna get yourself harassed for weeks if you put that out there!TexasScientist said:The resurrection shouldn't matter. Jesus was supposed to be the perfect unqualified sacrifice for All sins to be forgiven. If he had to be resurrected, then he wouldn't be the perfect sacrifice would he? You could just continue to sacrifice a chicken or goat and all would be good.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:It being a "what if" discussion doesn't affect what I said.RMF5630 said:It was a philosophical "what if" discussion. You don't have academic discussions on subjects that allow you to stretch your thought processes? Why does every post have to be a Manifesto with you?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Yeah, you know, salvation - the whole point of Jesus? Of Christianity? What I've been talking about this whole time??RMF5630 said:That is an interesting way to put it. I would have to defer to the message. What he said, the scriptures/prophecies and the second part of the equation, for Catholics anyway, is how I live my life.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:That wasn't my question - would your belief about the state of OUR SALVATION change if the resurrection wasn't true?RMF5630 said:Yes, I did.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:You didn't answer my question.RMF5630 said:And if you learned it didn't, it was a parable. Remember, this is a philosophical discussion, not an attack Could you still believe that God sent his son with the same message and had the same impact on the world? Would it change how and what you worshiped?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:So, if you believe a literal resurrection was necessary for salvation, then IF the resurrection isn't true, how would that NOT change your belief about salvation?RMF5630 said:The resurrection offers that sinful humans can be reconciled to God and thereby are offered salvation. Catholics, including me, believe in the resurrection of Jesus. None of that was what the conversation was about. The conversation was a "what if" and how it impacts you. But, you seem stuck on three words out of 8 pages. What it matters to you, I have no idea. We are not going to agree if this conversation is going where I expect.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Okay, let's be clear. Do you believe that our salvation is only possible through the actual, literal death and resurrection of Jesus?RMF5630 said:You took one line of an 8 page discussion on the Bible and a question a Moslem asked me 25 years ago and turned it into a faith statement. If you would read the other 10 or so posts you would see the context of the discussion was does the Bible HAVE to be literal. Obviously, you believe so. I do not, as it does not impact the way I live my life. I am done with this.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:It has nothing to do with what I believe. If it is true that your beliefs do not require the resurrection of Jesus to actually have happened, then it is definitional/logically correct to say your beliefs aren't Christian. Cursing doesn't change that fact.RMF5630 said:Believe what you will. I don't give a ***** Whether you think I am Christian or not is irrelevant. Direct enough?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:
Well, no, you said exactly that: "Some facts are documrntable[sic], there was a Census. Pilate existed. Etc... But some also seem to be parables or hyperbole, such as walking on water, calming the storm, fisher of man, even resurrection". Was this in error?
Also, it would be correct to say that if your beliefs don't require the resurrection of Jesus to actually have happened, then your beliefs are definitely not Christian.
I'm not asking you to give a **** about what I believe. You should give a **** about what is truth, though.
If it would change your belief, then your belief system actually does require a literal miracle. The miracle isn't "cementing" the belief as you suggested, it is foundational to it. It can't exist without it. That's my point.
The basis of the question was that the Koran is very logical, you can find and follow quite easily. My Moslem friend used this to show that it was superior to the Bible. Why? Because the Bible required believe in supernatural events. Events that could not be proved and a lot that went against what we know from science. After much thought, my answer was NO. It would not change what I believe, the message Christ has and the structure of the Church for worship and the impact his message had on the world would be enough to stay where I am.
Does that make sense? It is not an argument over what I believe, it is a "what if" from a Moslem with a logical Koran under his arm. Would you abandon Christ's message if the miracles did not take place?
"After much thought, my answer was NO. It would not change what I believe, that God sent his son, the message Christ has and the structure of the Church for worship and the impact his message had on the world would be enough to stay where I am."
If I found out it was not true, it would not change a thing I do. I would not go running to the Koran. I would not abandon the believe in God. I would not go looking for a new moral code.
The question was asked by a Moslem to make his religion more attractive, get it? You keep coming back to fundamental arguments of the Christian Faith.
By your response to all this, I have to believe you would walk away and look for something else.
You did say you believe salvation is possible only through the resurrected Jesus, right? So if he really didn't resurrect, how does that not change your belief about the state of our salvation?
The one fact that is inescapable is that he, his message and his followers changed the world. OldBear brought up an interesting point that people died not for his word, but for the believe he rose again. Which plays into my point of changing the world.
I do not think I would defer to Islam which is where my buddy was trying to lead me. If I was forced to look at another religion, I think I would go back to Judaism since that was the original. Interesting thought process, when thought about in terms of salvation... Maybe tequila! : )
Yikes. It's alarming that you didn't understand the implication of there being no miracles on your Christian beliefs right away.
My point was precisely that within this "what if" discussion, you didn't stretch your thought process to realize how having no miracles actually destroys the central Christian belief and hope; and on top of that, you were unable to grasp it even as I was repeatedly pointing it out to you in our back and forth. It's just my humble opinion, and I'm not saying you aren't a Christian, but this kinda raises red flags. Just telling you the truth.
'harassment'
That's why you initiate so many anti Christian threads.
Perfect sacrifice means perfect atonement. But death still has to be defeated. The hope of every Christian is not atonement + remain dead, it is atonement + raised to eternal life.TexasScientist said:The resurrection shouldn't matter. Jesus was supposed to be the perfect unqualified sacrifice for All sins to be forgiven. If he had to be resurrected, then he wouldn't be the perfect sacrifice would he? You could just continue to sacrifice a chicken or goat and all would be good.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:It being a "what if" discussion doesn't affect what I said.RMF5630 said:It was a philosophical "what if" discussion. You don't have academic discussions on subjects that allow you to stretch your thought processes? Why does every post have to be a Manifesto with you?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Yeah, you know, salvation - the whole point of Jesus? Of Christianity? What I've been talking about this whole time??RMF5630 said:That is an interesting way to put it. I would have to defer to the message. What he said, the scriptures/prophecies and the second part of the equation, for Catholics anyway, is how I live my life.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:That wasn't my question - would your belief about the state of OUR SALVATION change if the resurrection wasn't true?RMF5630 said:Yes, I did.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:You didn't answer my question.RMF5630 said:And if you learned it didn't, it was a parable. Remember, this is a philosophical discussion, not an attack Could you still believe that God sent his son with the same message and had the same impact on the world? Would it change how and what you worshiped?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:So, if you believe a literal resurrection was necessary for salvation, then IF the resurrection isn't true, how would that NOT change your belief about salvation?RMF5630 said:The resurrection offers that sinful humans can be reconciled to God and thereby are offered salvation. Catholics, including me, believe in the resurrection of Jesus. None of that was what the conversation was about. The conversation was a "what if" and how it impacts you. But, you seem stuck on three words out of 8 pages. What it matters to you, I have no idea. We are not going to agree if this conversation is going where I expect.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:
Okay, let's be clear. Do you believe that our salvation is only possible through the actual, literal death and resurrection of Jesus?
If it would change your belief, then your belief system actually does require a literal miracle. The miracle isn't "cementing" the belief as you suggested, it is foundational to it. It can't exist without it. That's my point.
The basis of the question was that the Koran is very logical, you can find and follow quite easily. My Moslem friend used this to show that it was superior to the Bible. Why? Because the Bible required believe in supernatural events. Events that could not be proved and a lot that went against what we know from science. After much thought, my answer was NO. It would not change what I believe, the message Christ has and the structure of the Church for worship and the impact his message had on the world would be enough to stay where I am.
Does that make sense? It is not an argument over what I believe, it is a "what if" from a Moslem with a logical Koran under his arm. Would you abandon Christ's message if the miracles did not take place?
"After much thought, my answer was NO. It would not change what I believe, that God sent his son, the message Christ has and the structure of the Church for worship and the impact his message had on the world would be enough to stay where I am."
If I found out it was not true, it would not change a thing I do. I would not go running to the Koran. I would not abandon the believe in God. I would not go looking for a new moral code.
The question was asked by a Moslem to make his religion more attractive, get it? You keep coming back to fundamental arguments of the Christian Faith.
By your response to all this, I have to believe you would walk away and look for something else.
You did say you believe salvation is possible only through the resurrected Jesus, right? So if he really didn't resurrect, how does that not change your belief about the state of our salvation?
The one fact that is inescapable is that he, his message and his followers changed the world. OldBear brought up an interesting point that people died not for his word, but for the believe he rose again. Which plays into my point of changing the world.
I do not think I would defer to Islam which is where my buddy was trying to lead me. If I was forced to look at another religion, I think I would go back to Judaism since that was the original. Interesting thought process, when thought about in terms of salvation... Maybe tequila! : )
Yikes. It's alarming that you didn't understand the implication of there being no miracles on your Christian beliefs right away.
My point was precisely that within this "what if" discussion, you didn't stretch your thought process to realize how having no miracles actually destroys the central Christian belief and hope; and on top of that, you were unable to grasp it even as I was repeatedly pointing it out to you in our back and forth. It's just my humble opinion, and I'm not saying you aren't a Christian, but this kinda raises red flags. Just telling you the truth.
Who of us is?RMF5630 said:As if Martin Luther was any less corrupt...drahthaar said:
So Pelosi won't get to "take communion" from her bishop in her Catholic church? That worship event has got nothing to do with her salvation or lack thereof. Check your heart and soul first. Then, Martin Luther says "Welcome to a lot of good company".
Taking about faith here, which boils down to an experience with God as He writes His law in our hearts and minds instead of tablets.
To Catholics it is more than a worship event. It is the ArchBishop's call. Just like it is the Lutheran Church's call to not let me have the one song my Mom wanted at our wedding because the Pastor did not like it. If we wanted to do it in his Church, my wife's family's church, we complied.drahthaar said:Who of us is?RMF5630 said:As if Martin Luther was any less corrupt...drahthaar said:
So Pelosi won't get to "take communion" from her bishop in her Catholic church? That worship event has got nothing to do with her salvation or lack thereof. Check your heart and soul first. Then, Martin Luther says "Welcome to a lot of good company".
Taking about faith here, which boils down to an experience with God as He writes His law in our hearts and minds instead of tablets.
TexasScientist said:The resurrection shouldn't matter. Jesus was supposed to be the perfect unqualified sacrifice for All sins to be forgiven. If he had to be resurrected, then he wouldn't be the perfect sacrifice would he? You could just continue to sacrifice a chicken or goat and all would be good.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:It being a "what if" discussion doesn't affect what I said.RMF5630 said:It was a philosophical "what if" discussion. You don't have academic discussions on subjects that allow you to stretch your thought processes? Why does every post have to be a Manifesto with you?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Yeah, you know, salvation - the whole point of Jesus? Of Christianity? What I've been talking about this whole time??RMF5630 said:That is an interesting way to put it. I would have to defer to the message. What he said, the scriptures/prophecies and the second part of the equation, for Catholics anyway, is how I live my life.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:That wasn't my question - would your belief about the state of OUR SALVATION change if the resurrection wasn't true?RMF5630 said:Yes, I did.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:You didn't answer my question.RMF5630 said:And if you learned it didn't, it was a parable. Remember, this is a philosophical discussion, not an attack Could you still believe that God sent his son with the same message and had the same impact on the world? Would it change how and what you worshiped?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:So, if you believe a literal resurrection was necessary for salvation, then IF the resurrection isn't true, how would that NOT change your belief about salvation?RMF5630 said:The resurrection offers that sinful humans can be reconciled to God and thereby are offered salvation. Catholics, including me, believe in the resurrection of Jesus. None of that was what the conversation was about. The conversation was a "what if" and how it impacts you. But, you seem stuck on three words out of 8 pages. What it matters to you, I have no idea. We are not going to agree if this conversation is going where I expect.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Okay, let's be clear. Do you believe that our salvation is only possible through the actual, literal death and resurrection of Jesus?RMF5630 said:You took one line of an 8 page discussion on the Bible and a question a Moslem asked me 25 years ago and turned it into a faith statement. If you would read the other 10 or so posts you would see the context of the discussion was does the Bible HAVE to be literal. Obviously, you believe so. I do not, as it does not impact the way I live my life. I am done with this.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:It has nothing to do with what I believe. If it is true that your beliefs do not require the resurrection of Jesus to actually have happened, then it is definitional/logically correct to say your beliefs aren't Christian. Cursing doesn't change that fact.RMF5630 said:Believe what you will. I don't give a ***** Whether you think I am Christian or not is irrelevant. Direct enough?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:
Well, no, you said exactly that: "Some facts are documrntable[sic], there was a Census. Pilate existed. Etc... But some also seem to be parables or hyperbole, such as walking on water, calming the storm, fisher of man, even resurrection". Was this in error?
Also, it would be correct to say that if your beliefs don't require the resurrection of Jesus to actually have happened, then your beliefs are definitely not Christian.
I'm not asking you to give a **** about what I believe. You should give a **** about what is truth, though.
If it would change your belief, then your belief system actually does require a literal miracle. The miracle isn't "cementing" the belief as you suggested, it is foundational to it. It can't exist without it. That's my point.
The basis of the question was that the Koran is very logical, you can find and follow quite easily. My Moslem friend used this to show that it was superior to the Bible. Why? Because the Bible required believe in supernatural events. Events that could not be proved and a lot that went against what we know from science. After much thought, my answer was NO. It would not change what I believe, the message Christ has and the structure of the Church for worship and the impact his message had on the world would be enough to stay where I am.
Does that make sense? It is not an argument over what I believe, it is a "what if" from a Moslem with a logical Koran under his arm. Would you abandon Christ's message if the miracles did not take place?
"After much thought, my answer was NO. It would not change what I believe, that God sent his son, the message Christ has and the structure of the Church for worship and the impact his message had on the world would be enough to stay where I am."
If I found out it was not true, it would not change a thing I do. I would not go running to the Koran. I would not abandon the believe in God. I would not go looking for a new moral code.
The question was asked by a Moslem to make his religion more attractive, get it? You keep coming back to fundamental arguments of the Christian Faith.
By your response to all this, I have to believe you would walk away and look for something else.
You did say you believe salvation is possible only through the resurrected Jesus, right? So if he really didn't resurrect, how does that not change your belief about the state of our salvation?
The one fact that is inescapable is that he, his message and his followers changed the world. OldBear brought up an interesting point that people died not for his word, but for the believe he rose again. Which plays into my point of changing the world.
I do not think I would defer to Islam which is where my buddy was trying to lead me. If I was forced to look at another religion, I think I would go back to Judaism since that was the original. Interesting thought process, when thought about in terms of salvation... Maybe tequila! : )
Yikes. It's alarming that you didn't understand the implication of there being no miracles on your Christian beliefs right away.
My point was precisely that within this "what if" discussion, you didn't stretch your thought process to realize how having no miracles actually destroys the central Christian belief and hope; and on top of that, you were unable to grasp it even as I was repeatedly pointing it out to you in our back and forth. It's just my humble opinion, and I'm not saying you aren't a Christian, but this kinda raises red flags. Just telling you the truth.
The sacrifice and the resurrection are part and parcel of the same thing.
So a chicken or goat was a more effective and efficient pathway to eternal life. Makes sense.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Perfect sacrifice means perfect atonement. But death still has to be defeated. The hope of every Christian is not atonement + remain dead, it is atonement + raised to eternal life.TexasScientist said:The resurrection shouldn't matter. Jesus was supposed to be the perfect unqualified sacrifice for All sins to be forgiven. If he had to be resurrected, then he wouldn't be the perfect sacrifice would he? You could just continue to sacrifice a chicken or goat and all would be good.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:It being a "what if" discussion doesn't affect what I said.RMF5630 said:It was a philosophical "what if" discussion. You don't have academic discussions on subjects that allow you to stretch your thought processes? Why does every post have to be a Manifesto with you?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Yeah, you know, salvation - the whole point of Jesus? Of Christianity? What I've been talking about this whole time??RMF5630 said:That is an interesting way to put it. I would have to defer to the message. What he said, the scriptures/prophecies and the second part of the equation, for Catholics anyway, is how I live my life.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:That wasn't my question - would your belief about the state of OUR SALVATION change if the resurrection wasn't true?RMF5630 said:Yes, I did.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:You didn't answer my question.RMF5630 said:And if you learned it didn't, it was a parable. Remember, this is a philosophical discussion, not an attack Could you still believe that God sent his son with the same message and had the same impact on the world? Would it change how and what you worshiped?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:So, if you believe a literal resurrection was necessary for salvation, then IF the resurrection isn't true, how would that NOT change your belief about salvation?RMF5630 said:The resurrection offers that sinful humans can be reconciled to God and thereby are offered salvation. Catholics, including me, believe in the resurrection of Jesus. None of that was what the conversation was about. The conversation was a "what if" and how it impacts you. But, you seem stuck on three words out of 8 pages. What it matters to you, I have no idea. We are not going to agree if this conversation is going where I expect.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:
Okay, let's be clear. Do you believe that our salvation is only possible through the actual, literal death and resurrection of Jesus?
If it would change your belief, then your belief system actually does require a literal miracle. The miracle isn't "cementing" the belief as you suggested, it is foundational to it. It can't exist without it. That's my point.
The basis of the question was that the Koran is very logical, you can find and follow quite easily. My Moslem friend used this to show that it was superior to the Bible. Why? Because the Bible required believe in supernatural events. Events that could not be proved and a lot that went against what we know from science. After much thought, my answer was NO. It would not change what I believe, the message Christ has and the structure of the Church for worship and the impact his message had on the world would be enough to stay where I am.
Does that make sense? It is not an argument over what I believe, it is a "what if" from a Moslem with a logical Koran under his arm. Would you abandon Christ's message if the miracles did not take place?
"After much thought, my answer was NO. It would not change what I believe, that God sent his son, the message Christ has and the structure of the Church for worship and the impact his message had on the world would be enough to stay where I am."
If I found out it was not true, it would not change a thing I do. I would not go running to the Koran. I would not abandon the believe in God. I would not go looking for a new moral code.
The question was asked by a Moslem to make his religion more attractive, get it? You keep coming back to fundamental arguments of the Christian Faith.
By your response to all this, I have to believe you would walk away and look for something else.
You did say you believe salvation is possible only through the resurrected Jesus, right? So if he really didn't resurrect, how does that not change your belief about the state of our salvation?
The one fact that is inescapable is that he, his message and his followers changed the world. OldBear brought up an interesting point that people died not for his word, but for the believe he rose again. Which plays into my point of changing the world.
I do not think I would defer to Islam which is where my buddy was trying to lead me. If I was forced to look at another religion, I think I would go back to Judaism since that was the original. Interesting thought process, when thought about in terms of salvation... Maybe tequila! : )
Yikes. It's alarming that you didn't understand the implication of there being no miracles on your Christian beliefs right away.
My point was precisely that within this "what if" discussion, you didn't stretch your thought process to realize how having no miracles actually destroys the central Christian belief and hope; and on top of that, you were unable to grasp it even as I was repeatedly pointing it out to you in our back and forth. It's just my humble opinion, and I'm not saying you aren't a Christian, but this kinda raises red flags. Just telling you the truth.
Sacrificing a goat accomplished the same thing without requiring resurrection. Not so good for the goat though.JXL said:TexasScientist said:The resurrection shouldn't matter. Jesus was supposed to be the perfect unqualified sacrifice for All sins to be forgiven. If he had to be resurrected, then he wouldn't be the perfect sacrifice would he? You could just continue to sacrifice a chicken or goat and all would be good.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:It being a "what if" discussion doesn't affect what I said.RMF5630 said:It was a philosophical "what if" discussion. You don't have academic discussions on subjects that allow you to stretch your thought processes? Why does every post have to be a Manifesto with you?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Yeah, you know, salvation - the whole point of Jesus? Of Christianity? What I've been talking about this whole time??RMF5630 said:That is an interesting way to put it. I would have to defer to the message. What he said, the scriptures/prophecies and the second part of the equation, for Catholics anyway, is how I live my life.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:That wasn't my question - would your belief about the state of OUR SALVATION change if the resurrection wasn't true?RMF5630 said:Yes, I did.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:You didn't answer my question.RMF5630 said:And if you learned it didn't, it was a parable. Remember, this is a philosophical discussion, not an attack Could you still believe that God sent his son with the same message and had the same impact on the world? Would it change how and what you worshiped?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:So, if you believe a literal resurrection was necessary for salvation, then IF the resurrection isn't true, how would that NOT change your belief about salvation?RMF5630 said:The resurrection offers that sinful humans can be reconciled to God and thereby are offered salvation. Catholics, including me, believe in the resurrection of Jesus. None of that was what the conversation was about. The conversation was a "what if" and how it impacts you. But, you seem stuck on three words out of 8 pages. What it matters to you, I have no idea. We are not going to agree if this conversation is going where I expect.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Okay, let's be clear. Do you believe that our salvation is only possible through the actual, literal death and resurrection of Jesus?RMF5630 said:You took one line of an 8 page discussion on the Bible and a question a Moslem asked me 25 years ago and turned it into a faith statement. If you would read the other 10 or so posts you would see the context of the discussion was does the Bible HAVE to be literal. Obviously, you believe so. I do not, as it does not impact the way I live my life. I am done with this.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:It has nothing to do with what I believe. If it is true that your beliefs do not require the resurrection of Jesus to actually have happened, then it is definitional/logically correct to say your beliefs aren't Christian. Cursing doesn't change that fact.RMF5630 said:Believe what you will. I don't give a ***** Whether you think I am Christian or not is irrelevant. Direct enough?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:
Well, no, you said exactly that: "Some facts are documrntable[sic], there was a Census. Pilate existed. Etc... But some also seem to be parables or hyperbole, such as walking on water, calming the storm, fisher of man, even resurrection". Was this in error?
Also, it would be correct to say that if your beliefs don't require the resurrection of Jesus to actually have happened, then your beliefs are definitely not Christian.
I'm not asking you to give a **** about what I believe. You should give a **** about what is truth, though.
If it would change your belief, then your belief system actually does require a literal miracle. The miracle isn't "cementing" the belief as you suggested, it is foundational to it. It can't exist without it. That's my point.
The basis of the question was that the Koran is very logical, you can find and follow quite easily. My Moslem friend used this to show that it was superior to the Bible. Why? Because the Bible required believe in supernatural events. Events that could not be proved and a lot that went against what we know from science. After much thought, my answer was NO. It would not change what I believe, the message Christ has and the structure of the Church for worship and the impact his message had on the world would be enough to stay where I am.
Does that make sense? It is not an argument over what I believe, it is a "what if" from a Moslem with a logical Koran under his arm. Would you abandon Christ's message if the miracles did not take place?
"After much thought, my answer was NO. It would not change what I believe, that God sent his son, the message Christ has and the structure of the Church for worship and the impact his message had on the world would be enough to stay where I am."
If I found out it was not true, it would not change a thing I do. I would not go running to the Koran. I would not abandon the believe in God. I would not go looking for a new moral code.
The question was asked by a Moslem to make his religion more attractive, get it? You keep coming back to fundamental arguments of the Christian Faith.
By your response to all this, I have to believe you would walk away and look for something else.
You did say you believe salvation is possible only through the resurrected Jesus, right? So if he really didn't resurrect, how does that not change your belief about the state of our salvation?
The one fact that is inescapable is that he, his message and his followers changed the world. OldBear brought up an interesting point that people died not for his word, but for the believe he rose again. Which plays into my point of changing the world.
I do not think I would defer to Islam which is where my buddy was trying to lead me. If I was forced to look at another religion, I think I would go back to Judaism since that was the original. Interesting thought process, when thought about in terms of salvation... Maybe tequila! : )
Yikes. It's alarming that you didn't understand the implication of there being no miracles on your Christian beliefs right away.
My point was precisely that within this "what if" discussion, you didn't stretch your thought process to realize how having no miracles actually destroys the central Christian belief and hope; and on top of that, you were unable to grasp it even as I was repeatedly pointing it out to you in our back and forth. It's just my humble opinion, and I'm not saying you aren't a Christian, but this kinda raises red flags. Just telling you the truth.
The sacrifice and the resurrection are part and parcel of the same thing.