Gee I dont know about you - but there have not been to many people killed in my church recently. Or even in the last century. But I am not denying that spats between the RC and the Protestant church have resulted in the deaths of many many people over the history of the church. Of course how much can be directly related to church theology or to the cultural acceptance of the time is another question. I say there is a true church - this however does not go by the name of presbyterian or baptist or anglican or charismatic. It does however have the common doctrines of the Trinity - and of the death and resurrection of Christ. In many places if not most places - the churches of all denominations work together quite closely. Sometimes people get heated up about particular doctrines - eg the recent Anglican split oveer gay marriages has causes serious divisions in that church –
Great strawman, TS. I knew you wouldn’t disappoint me. So few TrueChristianstm do. I do love how you just ignore that people were killing each other over religion. If you don’t think it was, please do show any evidence that it wasn’t directly church related. And, TS, the culture of a people *includes* their religion. They were told by their churches that those “others” were evil. And even your words show how this works. You “say there is a true church”, just like they all did. You want your version to be the “right” one, and all others are “wrong”. How typical. I have yet to see that in “most” places that churches work together. In my town, we have a mission that helps people. Why is it that they have to sent out appeal after appeal to the entire community *if* churches work together. Why does no one seem to know to help these people, all of those good church going Christians? And I know it’s the same in most communities. We have each little church with its fancy building, its own worship service, its own chicken barbeque to raise money, when they could save so much in just economies of scale it is sickening. I grew up in western PA, where the RCC is *still* looked upon with suspicion. My church broke up because of differences between “good Christians”. I’m sorry, TS, but with my evidence and your unsupported claims, I have little reason to believe you.
I have read your link and note that is said to be written by a calvinist. My view is that he is attempting to provide a way of communicating the essential truthes of the Reformed theology and does so in an interesting way. My understanding is that which I have articulated above - using the very words within the TULIP itself - PERSEVERENCE of the SAINTS. The Saints have to persevere - this is the essence of that doctrine and is part of the TULIP which provides the Christian with the humility to know that Salvation belongs to God not to mankind. I dont disagree with the verses used - but in context Jesus also says you will know them by their fruits. The doctrine of election is a doctrine that provides assurance to Christians that they do not have to earn their salvation - but the final doctrines is there to ensure that Christians do not take their own election as a right. In any event there are many websites and books which teach what I have articulated.
I do love when you have decided that you know better than some other Christian about what God “really meant”. Just hilarious. So, TS, can one lose one’s salvation? Simple yes or no question. It seems no from what you’ve said. So perseverance has little to do with anything and indeed it is a “get out of jail free card” if *nothing* can make you get in jail, not even if you stopped being “fruitful”. And TS, I know you’d have no idea that I was an atheist by my “fruits” e.g good actions, right?, unless I told you directly I was an atheist. So, this seems to be a rather untenable claim.
We worship with other churches because we accept that we are all Christians and saved by faith in Christ. What is so hard to understand about that? The fact that we use different buildings serves lots of different purposes - firstly within our denominations we have different backgrounds and practices - some baptise in a font some use a baptismal. Within the parametres of Christian thinking - there is also freedom and liberty. Whilst I may disagree with the arminian doctrine of free will - I have no issue with worshiping God with arminians. When I visit my mother - I always attend at the Baptist Church - and she always attends with me at the Presbyterian church when she visits with me.
TS, you’ve claimed that Baptists worship with other Christians. I asked why are there different churches then. I’m asking why is there no “true” church, as you’ve claimed exists, that all of you go to. Why are there half-empty churches in many towns, each clinging to their sect as if they were the only ones? Why not go to one all together? Yes, you do have different practices. You have different beliefs that indicate how right you are with your god. Baptism is indeed a good example. Is it from a font or from a pool? Is it adult or infant? And I love the idea that there is “freedom and liberty” in the parameters of “Christain thinking” when you all say the other is “wrong” in what they do. And you say that you have no problem with worshipping with Arminians but you disagree with one of their basic tenents. Are you worshipping with them, TS, sharing the same beliefs and practices, or are you in the
fair enough - I cannot read your mind and I should not be assuming to know you - but we all use our own experiences. and funnily enough - you reacted in a similar manner to what i expected. I deny that I lied.
If you cannot read my mind and you have never met me, but made claims about me, claims that you could not know to be true other than your assumptions, I find that if not a outright lie, a really badly thought out assumption. And wow, I’m reacting in a offended manner over your nonsense. Golly. You make a claim like this:
Atheists have no common theology (allegedly) but the doctrine that God does not exist.
A demonstrably false statement. Then you, when called on it say
I know that atheists are in denial and they get all sensitive about this partiuclar issue.
So you claim you “know” something about all atheists. If you didn’t know, that seems to be misinformation told about a group of people, e.g. false witnessing.
whatever. waffle is anything that is not directly related to the point. You made lots of assertions about me and you do not know me.
Then when I call on you to show that I was waffling, things suddenly become beside the point. Thanks for not addressing your claims and my points.
Is this site about judging Christians or is it about something else?
This site is for judging what Christians claim. You have been welcomed here to discuss your beliefs. It’s a discussion forum. It is not “preach to me and I’ll accept whatever you say with no consideration”. What else would you like to insinuate it is? It also would be nice if you would answer a question rather than ignoring it.
And another question ignoring my response. I have told you what I thought you meant right here
http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php?topic=16191.msg365649#msg365649 . I can show you what moving the goalposts means:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts Thank you for your apology. I disagree wrt to proving God exists or not. Evidence is often interpreted by people to meet with their own biases. Evidence can be repeated and sometimes it cannot. Evidence is what it is - and it can be analysed - but we all know that evidence like statistics is used for the person using the statistics or the evidence. Even under cross examination - the truth does not necessarily come out.
yes, evidence can be interpreted to meet biases. But not all of the time and not only people who disagree with you. Evidence should be able to be repeated if it is used as evidence. For example, evidence of a roberry needs evidence that is logical and known to have happened before and can so again. Claiming that a unicorn robbed me and flew off into the sky is not the same as saying I was robbed by a young woman with a .38 on the corner of 4th and Main. All evidence that theist have ever presented to me has been not been even the loosest definition of evidence. It is feelings, coincidence (attributable to *any* god btw), and stories that have nothing supporting them. Why should I believe your claims when you dont’ believe the claims of another theist and you share the exact same lack of evidence for them.
What about love and abstract concepts? A white piece of metal is quite distinct from love or hate or jealousy or faith. Economics is supposedly a science (social) but its evidence is utilised in many different ways by various fields and philosophies - abstract and concrete - but the evidence means contrary things to different people.
I do feel sorry for you if you have no evidence anyone loves you. That’s rather sad. I have plenty of evidence of hate, jealousy, love, passion, and faith. Yep, because faith causes people to do things, evidence. There is no similar evidence for your god. And I agree economics can be squirrely. People can claim evidence as supporting them. But again, not always. You yourself constantly claim “facts” supported by evidence and by your own argument, you could be totally wrong.
I am not asking for respect - lol - as for patronising comments with reasons behind them - sorry I dont buy that. It is too convenient for you to make some comment and then use your "superior" attitude as an excuse.
thanks for another baseless claim.
You say you lost your faith - well - that is too bad for you. If the faith was anything like you have attempted to articulate the christian faith is - then I say I am glad you have lost it.
aw, TS, nice attempt at the True Scotsman fallacy.
I say that I believe in God - the same God that has for many years been worshipped by many people with different understandings about the preciseness of God. How can anybody rationally think that any two people will have the same view exactly about God - if God is as he is portrayed in the Scriptures? For someone to say they dont believe because christians have contradicting views about God is in my mind absurd and irrational.
then so much for anything in the scriptures being accurate. Again, you depower your god so you can have an excuse. Why can’t got get his message through, TS?
As for a logical argument - what would be the purpose of faith then? Faith would lose all meaning.
that wasn’t a problem with God in the OT and NT.
And evidence - oh dear - look at the human for a moment - in my mind this is clear evidence for the existence of God - but because the human can also be clear evidence for the existence of aliens or for no - god etc- this evidence is considered no evidence at all. I say everything is evidence for God -but what does that mean? It means that God has revealed himself to me. But how do I prove that? by the way I live and the way I act and the way I present myself. but there are many people in the world who are not christians who live good lives? Yes that is true. but to what end? My end is to glorify God and to enjoy him forever. Other people who lead lives to what end? To their own end - or to their own God's end or to no end. That is a significant difference.
all things all theists no matter what god they worship claim. Everything is evidence for Allah, Vishnu, the Great Spirit. I live in the “right” way because of Allah, Vishnu, the Great Spirit. I do love how you devalue all of the good that people do so you can feel special. I live a good life because I care about the world and my fellow living beings. I care. I don’t expect a reward from a magical being in the sky. I don’t believe that any being worth worshipping *needs* to be worshipped or *needs* glory.
I neve started any of my posts saying that my version was correct or the right one. I accept that I imply this -but so does everyone on this site - so nothing is gained in that insight.
oh this is rich. Yes, you do “imply” this. What is gained by this insight is that I support my claims. You do not. You have decided that you are right and with no evidence of such a thing.
I apoligise if i have ignored you. I hope this post goes some way to answering some of your questions. I also do not agree that you demonstrated that you were correct and I was wrong. In one case I accept that I had misunderstood my own view -but i have now addressed that. It may be that i am mad or a nut - but then again I may not be.
Until you can demonstrate me wrong, I do not care what you agree about. Simple as that. And until you have any evidence that you are not just one more theist with the same nonsense, you are just playing with Pascal’s wager. And that is a losing one.
