02-12-2007, 07:56 PM | #741 | |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,535
|
What happens then, Hector?
Quote:
|
|
02-12-2007, 09:28 PM | #742 | ||
Co-President of Entmoot
Super Moderator Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 8,397
|
You know it! See you in the Teacup Cafe, where drinks are free for Mooters.
__________________
"I can add some more, if you'd like it. Calling your Chief Names, Wishing to Punch his Pimply Face, and Thinking you Shirriffs look a lot of Tom-fools." - Sam Gamgee, p. 340, Return of the King Quote:
Quote:
|
||
02-13-2007, 02:10 AM | #743 | |||||||||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
Quote:
Also, I didn't mean to call the Greek Orthodox Church an offshoot. My apologies to Hector and Gwai, on that. By the way, if I sound snappish here, it's all a result of the text and not any part of my mood . Quote:
Quote:
And I repeat that Mormons are not considered to be Christians by any of the major denominations. Quote:
Quote:
But concluding that the Bible is flawed because there is a dispute between Christians over part of it is clearly ridiculous, and comparable to the analogy I already made. Quote:
You're also trying to shove me into new positions for you to punch at, positions I am not holding. I have never said you must rely on my ability to "select instructions for God." Rather, in my post I said: Quote:
Quote:
And there is no contradiction in my statements regarding the majority. My comments about there being a consensus in the Church regarding most of the Bible were a refutation of your claim that there was strong disagreement in the Church as to which were the divinely inspired books of the Bible. So you were the one who first introduced the idea that the Bible can't be trusted because people disagree, and I was merely correcting you by pointing out that most don't disagree. Which doesn't mean that the Bible accepted by the majority is true. It just means that there is a general consensus among most Christians that it is true, though maybe they're wrong. Yes, there are disagreements over the Apocrypha. However, it is very important to note that all the books included in the Protestant Bible are accepted by the Greek Orthodox and the Catholic Church. So there is almost uniform agreement on those books. Only about the Apocrypha is there real disagreement. If you want to argue, "because the Apocrypha is being debated, it can't be trusted," you can try that, though that argument is deeply flawed, as I already pointed out. The simple fact that there is disagreement over the accuracy of books doesn't mean automatically that those books are unreliable- the side that doubt these books may just be wrong. But even if you try to argue this, you still can't jump from the Apocrypha to all the other books of the Bible and say that because there is debate over the Apocrypha, all the books are in question. In fact, the books in the Protestant Bible are not questioned by any of the major denominations, including Catholics and Greek Orthodox. There are probably a few offshoot Christian groups and smaller denominations that disagree with some of these books, but none of the major denominations. The Church is very uniform about these books. Arguing that because Catholics and Protestants disagree over the Apocrypha, the whole Bible is unreliable, is absurd. If you want to say that because of this disagreement, the Apocrypha is unreliable, that is still flawed logic, but it at least does not sweepingly generalize over every book, including all those that are agreed on. Quote:
*Waits to see if sisterandcousinandaunt will respond to the position he's fashioned against himself.*
__________________
If the world has indeed, as I have said, been built of sorrow, it has been built by the hands of love, because in no other way could the soul of man, for whom the world was made, reach the full stature of its perfection. ~Oscar Wilde, written from prison Oscar Wilde's last words: "Either the wallpaper goes, or I do." Last edited by Lief Erikson : 02-13-2007 at 02:20 AM. |
|||||||||
02-13-2007, 02:26 AM | #744 | |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
Quote:
Though I still think that one of your arguments was a red herring and the rest amounted to a bunch of personal attacks and misrepresentation of me and the available data . Not meaning to complain . . . And I do honestly thank you for working with the colors and fonts to make it clear what was your post and what was mine, and what you were responding to. I thought that your chosen format was rather pretty .
__________________
If the world has indeed, as I have said, been built of sorrow, it has been built by the hands of love, because in no other way could the soul of man, for whom the world was made, reach the full stature of its perfection. ~Oscar Wilde, written from prison Oscar Wilde's last words: "Either the wallpaper goes, or I do." |
|
02-13-2007, 02:49 AM | #745 | |||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
Quote:
You don't need to have a complete New Testament to have strong consistency evidence. Single books, or even fragments of books, can prove an early date for the writing, and are useful for demonstrating both distribution and consistency. Quote:
Another huge source of variations is involved in the differences between the Greek and English language. In Greek, the order of words in a sentence doesn't matter much. One word functions as the subject of the sentence regardless of where it is in the sequence, so if the word order differs in different sentences from manuscript to manuscript, this doesn't alter the meaning of the sentence. Yet the linguistically irrelevant differences in the arrangement of the words isn't taken into account when variants are determined, so you get vast numbers of "variations" which make no difference when it comes down to the meaning of the text. Real errors, in fact, are so rare that scholars Norman Geisler and William Nix concluded, "The New Testament, then, has not only survived in more manuscripts than any other book from antiquity, but it has survived in a purer form than any other great book-a form that is 99.5 percent pure." Quote:
__________________
If the world has indeed, as I have said, been built of sorrow, it has been built by the hands of love, because in no other way could the soul of man, for whom the world was made, reach the full stature of its perfection. ~Oscar Wilde, written from prison Oscar Wilde's last words: "Either the wallpaper goes, or I do." Last edited by Lief Erikson : 02-13-2007 at 01:57 PM. |
|||
02-13-2007, 10:10 AM | #746 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,535
|
I think at this point, Leif,
I can summarize our significant points of disagreement in this thread.
You believe you can make a determination of who is Christian. I believe each individual, or sect, is entitled to make that determination for him/her/itself. I, in fact, believe that God requires us to do so. You believe that, because your determination excludes certain groups, you can discuss the Bible as inerrant despite discarding chunks of it. I do not. It's not 'partially errant'. It is, or it ain't. You reject "liberal Christianity" because (in part) it does not adhere to your sense of "Biblical faithfulness." I believe you're wrong to do so, because you are faithful so selectively. That is what you complain of in the liberals. When I say, "You select God's instructions for us." I am referring to this behavior of defining Christian belief as nearly identical with American Fundamentalism, the Bible with the books associated with the American Protestant Church, and the Christian Church as "people who share this map," which apparently the Holy Spirit endorses 'for ears that can hear'. I think that there are plenty of people, historically, worldwide, and currently, with 'ears that can hear' who have drawn different conclusions, FROM the Word of God, and DUE to the Word of God. I am not willing to see their piety, insight, or sacrifices impugned by this jejune and adolescent attitude certain people in the American religious community have taken it upon themselves to present as "Christianity." It is, in my opinion, an affront to religion, as a whole, to the principles of the founding fathers of the United States of America, and perhaps to God, personally. And you disagree. |
02-13-2007, 10:45 AM | #747 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
I see that I was right in guessing that you had decided to just argue against yourself from now on. Maybe it's easier for you than arguing against me (as Mr. Collins says, "I flatter myself") .
You've misrepresented my position on almost every point! Since you clearly prefer to debate yourself than to debate me, I'll leave you to the fun of fighting solo. Toodles! ~Lief
__________________
If the world has indeed, as I have said, been built of sorrow, it has been built by the hands of love, because in no other way could the soul of man, for whom the world was made, reach the full stature of its perfection. ~Oscar Wilde, written from prison Oscar Wilde's last words: "Either the wallpaper goes, or I do." |
02-13-2007, 11:54 AM | #748 | |
Master of Orchestration President Emeritus of Entmoot 2004-2008
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Lost in the Opera House
Posts: 9,328
|
Quote:
__________________
ACALEWIA- President of Entmoot hectorberlioz- Vice President of Entmoot Acaly und Hektor fur Presidants fur EntMut fur life! Join the discussion at Entmoot Election 2010. "Stupidissimo!"~Toscanini The Da CINDY Code The Epic Poem Of The Balrog of Entmoot: Here ~NEW! ~ Thinking of summer vacation? AboutNewJersey.com - NJ Travel & Tourism Guide |
|
02-13-2007, 04:21 PM | #749 | |
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Reality
Posts: 3,767
|
Quote:
Look at any law on the books and you will see that even the simplest are spelled out in excessive detail to cover any possible situation and to limit interpretation as much as possible. The bible doesn't even attempt to do this. Much of what any given denomination claims to be the "absolute truth" is based upon a line or two of text here and there, lines which often aren't all that clear in the first place.
__________________
Your reality, sir, is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever. |
|
02-13-2007, 06:40 PM | #750 | |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
Quote:
Paul mentioned in one passage of one of the epistles that some people were baptized for the dead, but what that means was left entirely unclear. Mormons, however, have taken that one passage and interpreted it as saying that physical baptism for people who are already dead can save their souls. Not that I'm saying they're wrong- I'm just pointing out that the scripture doesn't warrant the conclusion, unless one also accepts the Book of Mormon as the Word of God. But major Christian doctrines are not so controversial. You're right that there are some issues where there is one passage found somewhere that seems to say one thing, but someone disagrees. That tends to divide people. But on all the central doctrines of Christianity, there are multiple passages that all say the same thing. That is why I don't go and condemn people from other denominations as non-Christian- like Catholics. Catholics believe some things that are different from what I do, but so does most everyone. Catholics, and most all the denominations, hold to the core doctrines. The Bible repeats central doctrines in multiple places. The Trinity, for instance, can be found in many parts of the Bible, in both the Old and the New Testaments. The Incarnation of Christ is explicit and repeatedly referred to. His crucifixion and resurrection are clear and repeated in many places. The Second Coming is repeated in many places. The major doctrines are all repeated multiple times. So people can be Christian and have a lot of differences. There aren't disputes that I know of between the major denominations, in modern times anyway, which cause one to call the other non-Christian. For we still agree on the essentials. But there is disagreement on a lot of matters of interpretation, and almost all of that disagreement is focused on issues that aren't essential to people's salvation. Another valid point is that the Word of God has many shades and levels of meaning. One passage can mean many things simultaneously, and hence the Bible would be weakening its message by hammering down single definitions and interpretations for single words or passages. Sometimes the Holy Spirit will lead one person to one interpretation and another person to another interpretation. They are both right, only being spoken to by God in different ways, and then mistakenly believing that their interpretation is the only correct one. So some of that goes on too. The Lord gave me a dream about it once, when I was having a big debate with Gwaimir about the meaning of Communion. In my dream, I saw many people, each representing a denomination, dancing on a hill. There was elegant, beautiful dancing going on, and the hill was on an island containing beautiful gardens, pools and architecture. A man representing the Lord was standing at the front of the dance, and whenever he turned a steering wheel in his hand, the entire structure of the garden changed. Gardens, architecture and pools all changed positions, like a puzzle being arranged differently, and the new formation was equally beautiful. Nothing had been lost- only a different perspective on it all was gained. Each jolt of the island's shift caused the dancers to lose balance and have difficulty continuing dancing, until the shift was complete and stability resumed. Then the Lord would turn the steering wheel again, after a while, and another shift would emerge. The dream showed that difficulties in the dance or the unity of the churches of God arise from doctrinal differences, but often those differences simply come from God revealing different truths to different people through his single Word. And I'm sure that all the denominations have some things wrong, but also, many times we are mistaken in being too judgmental, for that places an unnecessary limitation on God and his ability to speak through his Word. A key issue that needs to be remembered, in this discussion, is that the Holy Spirit is a teacher. Jesus said, "I am sending you a Counselor." The Spirit interacts with us, revealing the meaning of God's Word for those with ears God has opened, and especially those in whom he is living. For that is another angle of Communion, the communion between God and man that results of each living in the other. The Spirit doesn't leave us to interpret things in whatever way we wish, but rather reveals the truth of God that lives in the Word. Some people don't have the Spirit, though, and many Christians also sadly lack a relationship with God. One can see and learn much by knowing God and hearing his voice. I learned one angle recently of why Jesus said, "I am the truth," which relates to relativism. Without God, knowledge comes from humanity and hence might very easily be wrong, disproven in a few years, and even the disproving may be disproved in another few years. Science keeps changing. Human understanding keeps changing constantly, and no one can know what is true and what isn't, in a final way. For all we know, we might even be in the Matrix. Relativism dominates all, if God is excluded. God is the only absolute that can be relied upon. Hence, he is "the truth," as truth cannot be understood with any certainty outside of him, and the absolutes cannot be known without him. As there is no certain truth we can rely on outside of him, he is "the truth." And your disagreement with me in page 238 of the Philosophy Thread, where you said all is still relative because it's still humanity deciding whether or not to rely on God, and so it still comes down to relative humans, fails on two counts. First is the logical flaw that the fact that some humans might choose to ignore God when he has plainly revealed his truth to them doesn't mean that God is unreliable or that truth is relative, but merely that humans are unreliable. The second problem with that position is that paradise is not due to our strength in holding to God, but rather is due to his strength in holding to us. In the final analysis, nothing depends on relative humans and their relative human knowledge, but on the absolute God and his absolute knowledge and absolute power.
__________________
If the world has indeed, as I have said, been built of sorrow, it has been built by the hands of love, because in no other way could the soul of man, for whom the world was made, reach the full stature of its perfection. ~Oscar Wilde, written from prison Oscar Wilde's last words: "Either the wallpaper goes, or I do." Last edited by Lief Erikson : 02-13-2007 at 07:06 PM. |
|
02-13-2007, 07:42 PM | #751 | |
Word Santa Claus
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,922
|
Quote:
__________________
Sufficient to have stood, yet free to fall. |
|
02-13-2007, 07:57 PM | #752 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,535
|
Lief, you talk a lot.
That makes addressing each of your points very difficult. It doesn't make you right, it just makes it difficult to address them.
But, choosing one. So people can be Christian and have a lot of differences. There aren't disputes that I know of between the major denominations, in modern times anyway, which cause one to call the other non-Christian. For we still agree on the essentials Here we are again, with this "major denominations" BS. Name the "major denominations" which, in modern times, have not had a dispute which cause one to call the others 'non-Christian.' Whichever one YOU belong to sure doesn't fall into that category. You're calling people 'non-Christian' all over. Here is information on religious adherents in the US, based on the National Survey of Religious Identification as cited on http://www.adherents.com/rel_USA.html. "The largest, most comprehensive surveys on religious identification were done in sociologists Barry A. Kosmin, Seymour P. Lachman and associates at the Graduate School of the City University of New York. Their first major study was done in 1990: the National Survey of Religious Identification (NSRI). This scientific nationwide survey of 113,000 Americans asked about religious preference, along with other questions. They followed this up, with even more sophisticated methodology and more questions, with the American Religious Identity Survey (ARIS) conducted in 2001, with a sample size of 50,000 Americans. Top Ten Largest Religions in the United States, 1990 (self-identification, NSRI) Religion Estimated Adult Pop. Estimated % of Adult Pop. Christianity 151,225,000 86.2% Nonreligious 13,116,000 7.5% Judaism 3,137,000 1.8% Agnostic 1,186,000 0.7% Islam 527,000 * 0.5% Unitarian Universalist 502,000 0.3% Buddhism 401,000 * 0.4% Hinduism 227,000 * 0.2% Native American Religion 47,000 0.03% Scientologist 45,000 0.03% * Islam, Buddhist, Hindu figures in table have been adjusted upwards by Kosmin to account for possible undercou Christianity. Note that in the NSRI and ARIS studies, based on self-identification, Christianity includes: Catholic, Baptist, Protestant, Methodist/Wesleyan, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Pentecostal/Charismatic, Episcopalian/Anglican, Mormon/Latter-day Saints/LDS, Churches of Christ, Jehovah's Witness, Seventh-Day Adventist, Assemblies of God, Holiness/Holy, Congregational/United Church of Christ, Church of the Nazarine, Church of God, Eastern Orthodox, Evangelical, Mennonite, Christian Science, Church of the Brethren, Born Again, Nondenominational Christians, Disciples of Christ, Reformed/Dutch Reformed, Apostolic/New Apostolic, Quaker, Full Gospel, Christian Reform, Foursquare Gospel, Fundamentalist, Salvation Army, Independent Christian Church, Covenant Church, Jewish Christians, plus 240,000 adults classified as "other" (who did not fall into the preceding groups). " Largest Branches of Christianity in the U.S. (self-identification, Pew Research Council) In February and March 2002 the Pew Research Council conducted a survey of 2,002 adults. Questions about religious preference were included. People who identified their religious preference as Christian were asked about which branch of Christianity they belonged to. The table below was published on page 49 of the Pew report at http://pewforum.org/publications/reports/poll2002.pdf: Survey Response %, June 1996 %, March 2001 %, March 2002 Protestant 53 53 52 Catholic 23 23 24 Mormon (Latter-day Saints) 2 2 2 Orthodox 1 1 * Non-denominational 1 0 0 Something else (Specify) 1 * 2 Not practicing any religion 1 0 0 Don't know/Refused 2 3 2 TOTAL CHRISTIAN 84% 82% 82% The percentages shown in this table reflect the number of members of each branch as a proportion of the total U.S. population, not just the Christian population. So the Catholic percentage of 24% for 2002 means that 24% of Americans identified themselves as Catholic in 2002. This table matches data from Gallup, Barna, and other polling organizations, which all show that Protestants are clearly the largest branch of Christianity in the United States, followed by Catholics, who have about half as many members. Latter-day Saints (Mormons) are the 3rd largest branch, comprising about 2% of the U.S. population. Catholics, Latter-day Saints, and Orthodox Christians are all branches as well as denominational families, but the Protestant branch of Christianity comprises multiple denominational families. More detailed denominational family statistics are shown below. This table was published in a study titled "Americans Struggle with Religion's Role at Home and Abroad", released on March 20, 2002. The authors listed are: Andrew Kohut, director of The Pew Research Center For The People & The Press Melissa Rogers, executive director of The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life Methodology: "The nationwide survey of 2,002 adults, conducted Feb. 25 - March 10 by the Pew Research Center and the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life..." People who identified their religious preference as Christian were asked about which branch of Christianity they belonged to: "Q.19 Are you Protestant, Catholic, Mormon, Orthodox--such as Greek or Russian Orthodox--or something else?" (page 49) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- So. You've, personally, eliminated Mormons. Then there's folks who don't support your view of the Trinity as essential doctrine. That would include Christian Unitarians, Christian Scientists, the Society of Friends, Jehovah's Witnesses and Oneness Pentacostals. Is the Westboro Baptist Church Christian? Apparently Catholics aren't. http://www.ianpaisley.org/tiara.asp If you haven't seen people call other people "not Christian" based on doctrinal differences, you can't be opening a newspaper, much less surfing the Web. |
02-13-2007, 09:27 PM | #753 | ||
Co-President of Entmoot
Super Moderator Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 8,397
|
The reason Mormons aren't considered Christians is because they believe both the Book of Mormon and the Bible are the Word of God. I'm pretty sure it's a rule that you can't believe any book but the Bible is the Word, along with believing that Jesus is the Son of God.
This is not at all the same as differing theological interpretations of the Bible between different Christian denominations, as all groups believe that only the Bible is the Word of God, and that Jesus is the Son of God. This doesn't mean that Mormonism is a less valid world view or anything, it simply means that Mormonism is a religion that branched off from Christianity, which I think is pretty rad actually.
__________________
"I can add some more, if you'd like it. Calling your Chief Names, Wishing to Punch his Pimply Face, and Thinking you Shirriffs look a lot of Tom-fools." - Sam Gamgee, p. 340, Return of the King Quote:
Quote:
|
||
02-13-2007, 09:44 PM | #754 | |
Fëanáro's Fire Mistress
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Indiana, USA
Posts: 1,423
|
Quote:
I think that Mormons also believe that Jesus isn't really God but is more of a "sub-deity" (not as great as the God the Father). This is why the Catholic Church won't consider a person baptised in the Mormon tradition as a real Christian. |
|
02-13-2007, 10:45 PM | #755 |
Master of Orchestration President Emeritus of Entmoot 2004-2008
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Lost in the Opera House
Posts: 9,328
|
*Ahem*
Both Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses come from some kind of "Gnostic" seed or other, so technically, they're heretics. I'm willing to forgive Mitt Romney though, and I doubt he even knows that Mormonism is an ancient heresy in different clothing...
__________________
ACALEWIA- President of Entmoot hectorberlioz- Vice President of Entmoot Acaly und Hektor fur Presidants fur EntMut fur life! Join the discussion at Entmoot Election 2010. "Stupidissimo!"~Toscanini The Da CINDY Code The Epic Poem Of The Balrog of Entmoot: Here ~NEW! ~ Thinking of summer vacation? AboutNewJersey.com - NJ Travel & Tourism Guide |
02-13-2007, 11:02 PM | #756 | |
Fëanáro's Fire Mistress
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Indiana, USA
Posts: 1,423
|
Quote:
|
|
02-13-2007, 11:02 PM | #757 | ||||||||||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
Quote:
So sisterandcousinandaunt, in your opinion, the Graduate School of the City University of New York has the right to decide who is Christian and who is not? A secular research center gets to decide for the Christians who is Christian, in your opinion, and not the major denominations? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Your only evidence is a single church. The evidence of a single church is not the same as the evidence of a major denomination. It's like saying, "There is a major poverty problem in the US! The proof is that I know a poor man!" If you know one poor man, that doesn't mean there's a major poverty problem. If a Baptist church claims Catholics aren't Christian, that doesn't mean that this is the position of the Baptist denomination as a whole. Quote:
I would first refer you to certain prophecies of the Messiah found in Isaiah 9:6-7. Quote:
Here is another prophecy of the Messiah: Quote:
Another relevant Messianic prophecy is found in Isaiah 52:13 through Isaiah 53. That is one of the most glorious prophecies of the Messiah, to us Christians. It describes more directly the way that the Anointed One would be "cut off," saying he would be "pierced for our transgressions," and that "by his wounds we are healed." His refusing to open his mouth is just as Christ did, when "led like a lamb to the slaughter." He was assigned a grave with the wicked, even as Jesus was crucified with criminals. Yet, "after the suffering of his soul, he will see the light of life and be satisfied; by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities. Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors." He would see the "light of life," after dying, just as Jesus was resurrected from the dead, and even as he would "divide the spoils with the strong," Ephesians 4:8 says of Jesus, "when he ascended on high, he led captives in his train and gave gifts to men." If Jesus was the Messiah, as your prophecies seem to say, and if the Messiah was God, as your prophecies seem to say, the Trinity is supported in Hebrew scriptures. There are many other scripture prophecies I could point us to, which Jesus fulfilled in his life and ministry. But back to the Trinity now, I would like to next point out Genesis 1. The word for "God" which is used is "Elohim," which is plural. So even as we affirm God's oneness, we declare him simultaneously to be plural through the use of that word. There was a passage in Ezekiel also, where God said that his Spirit roved to and fro across the land, searching for someone to pray for Israel, but could find no one. God is there referred to in plurality as well, but I'm having trouble finding it.
__________________
If the world has indeed, as I have said, been built of sorrow, it has been built by the hands of love, because in no other way could the soul of man, for whom the world was made, reach the full stature of its perfection. ~Oscar Wilde, written from prison Oscar Wilde's last words: "Either the wallpaper goes, or I do." Last edited by Lief Erikson : 02-13-2007 at 11:05 PM. |
||||||||||
02-13-2007, 11:04 PM | #758 | |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,535
|
You guys slay me.
Quote:
WHAT GIVES YOU PEOPLE THE RIGHT TO PASS JUDGEMENT ON THEIR IDENTITY? |
|
02-13-2007, 11:05 PM | #759 | |
Master of Orchestration President Emeritus of Entmoot 2004-2008
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Lost in the Opera House
Posts: 9,328
|
Quote:
They believe that Christ is human, they don't believe in the trinity...they believe only a certain thousand will make it into heaven (so why bother with the tracts?!!)...lots of stuff. btw, Prince, the singer, is a Jehovah's Witness.
__________________
ACALEWIA- President of Entmoot hectorberlioz- Vice President of Entmoot Acaly und Hektor fur Presidants fur EntMut fur life! Join the discussion at Entmoot Election 2010. "Stupidissimo!"~Toscanini The Da CINDY Code The Epic Poem Of The Balrog of Entmoot: Here ~NEW! ~ Thinking of summer vacation? AboutNewJersey.com - NJ Travel & Tourism Guide |
|
02-13-2007, 11:07 PM | #760 | |
Master of Orchestration President Emeritus of Entmoot 2004-2008
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Lost in the Opera House
Posts: 9,328
|
Quote:
Their beliefs? Eh? Maybe a Satanist thinks he's christian, and if he told any secular institution, they'd think it was kinda cool, adn list him as one. BUT HE WOULDN'T BE. And I have NEVER heard that Mormons classify themselves as Christians. Externally they resemble christians, and they may depend on that the way I do on people's knowledge of Catholicism so I don't have to explain three hours worth of pre-Lutheran history explaining Orthodoxy.
__________________
ACALEWIA- President of Entmoot hectorberlioz- Vice President of Entmoot Acaly und Hektor fur Presidants fur EntMut fur life! Join the discussion at Entmoot Election 2010. "Stupidissimo!"~Toscanini The Da CINDY Code The Epic Poem Of The Balrog of Entmoot: Here ~NEW! ~ Thinking of summer vacation? AboutNewJersey.com - NJ Travel & Tourism Guide Last edited by hectorberlioz : 02-13-2007 at 11:14 PM. |
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
LOTR Discussion: Appendix A, Part 1 | Valandil | LOTR Discussion Project | 26 | 12-28-2007 06:36 AM |
Rotk - Trivia - Part 3 | Spock | Lord of the Rings Books | 277 | 12-05-2006 11:01 AM |
LotR Films in Retrospect and Changed Opinions | bropous | Lord of the Rings Movies | 41 | 07-14-2006 10:14 AM |
Were the Nazgul free from Sauron for the most part of the Third Age? | Gordis | Middle Earth | 141 | 07-09-2006 07:16 PM |
Theological Opinions | Nurvingiel | General Messages | 992 | 02-10-2006 04:15 PM |