Theological Opinions

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Perhaps you aren't aware of how some missionaries are, like those from our church. There's one missionary from our church who works with disabled kids in India. They're despised in their culture, and abandoned by their families; she loves them and takes care of them and helps them (she's a physical therapist). Would you like to email her and ask her to abandon them?

No of course not! I don't usually make blanket statements (I don't agree ever) and now I know why. Note to self: Do not post in the theology thread after a morning of reading The Poisonwood Bible.
I think that doing good and charitable things because you believe God wants you to help other people is awesome. I generally do not like the idea of this going hand in hand with trying to convert people.

Maybe missions and missionaries should be our next point of discussion.

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

did you know a group of missionaries slaughtered a whole monastary because the monks refused to turn to christianity in china? peaceful buddhist monks they were

[Nurvingiel]

I think we can safely say that historically, some very awful things were carried out claiming support from God. RÃ*an made a good point about modern missionaries though.

[Butterbeer]

Quote:
Originally Posted by RÃ*an
Perhaps you aren't aware of how some missionaries are, like those from our church. There's one missionary from our church who works with disabled kids in India. They're despised in their culture, and abandoned by their families; she loves them and takes care of them and helps them (she's a physical therapist). Would you like to email her and ask her to abandon them?

Nurv:
No of course not! I don't usually make blanket statements (I don't agree ever) and now I know why. Note to self: Do not post in the theology thread after a morning of reading The Poisonwood Bible.
I think that doing good and charitable things because you believe God wants you to help other people is awesome. I generally do not like the idea of this going hand in hand with trying to convert people.

Maybe missions and missionaries should be our next point of discussion.

I was rather hoping you were just going to say "Yes thanks if you wouldn't mind doing that for me!"
just because it was SUCH a loaded question!

last child: did you know a group of missionaries slaughtered a whole monastary because the monks refused to turn to christianity in china? peaceful buddhist monks they were

mind you, you can't be too careful with those peaceful buddhist monks y'know

Nurvingiel
I think we can safely say that historically, some very awful things were carried out claiming support from God. RÃ*an made a good point about modern missionaries though.

not perhaps claiming support from god ( i can hardly see god up there having a beer watching the reality tv going "Go on my son! 'Ave im!")
take it you mean in the name of God? And yes to be serious Rian does make a good point in general about modern day Missionaries: i just rather thought she loaded the question a teeny bit too much?


what should we talk about next? well its the theology thread and personally i'll leave it to those who want to discuss serious theological issues.

So its goodbye from me and so long and thanks for all the fish!


__________________

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

I think we can safely say that historically, some very awful things were carried out claiming support from God. RÃ*an made a good point about modern missionaries though.

Some modern missionaries are like that while many go around trying to convert in exchange for their "help"

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

Some modern missionaries are like that while many go around trying to convert in exchange for their "help"

Your use of the words "some" and "many" imply that more missionaries are of a negative variety then are of the positive. Have you data to back up these assertions?

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by Butterbeer

I was rather hoping you were just going to say "Yes thanks if you wouldn't mind doing that for me!"
just because it was SUCH a loaded question!

Lol!! Yes, it was, but I already said one thing I don't really believe on the subject. (Even though this time I'd be joking.)

Originally Posted by Butterbeer

not perhaps claiming support from god ( i can hardly see god up there having a beer watching the reality tv going "Go on my son! 'Ave im!")
take it you mean in the name of God? And yes to be serious Rian does make a good point in general about modern day Missionaries: i just rather thought she loaded the question a teeny bit too much?

Yes, that's why I said "claiming support". The people in the Crusades thought they were doing God's work (or they just wanted an excuse to get some land) so that's what they said. Were they really doing God's work? I don't think so.

Originally Posted by Butterbeer

what should we talk about next? well its the theology thread and personally i'll leave it to those who want to discuss serious theological issues.

So its goodbye from me and so long and thanks for all the fish!

Well I'm happy to keep talking about missions. But you don't have to leave!
This thread could use a little levity...

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

Your use of the words "some" and "many" imply that more missionaries are of a negative variety then are of the positive. Have you data to back up these assertions?

Most missionaries - especially the evangilical kind - are out there for recruitment. I have a friend who used to go into shelters and the only way he was allowed to stay would be if he attended their bible and religious services.

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Last Child of Ungoliant

did you know a group of missionaries slaughtered a whole monastary because the monks refused to turn to christianity in china? peaceful buddhist monks they were

Alright, shall we drag out all our cheerful atrocity stories now?

I think it's pretty safe to say that people of ALL beliefs have committed atrocities. A "group of missionaries" may have slaughtered a whole monastary, but there's plenty of good, peaceful, caring missionaries that have been slaughtered themselves.

*reads further* Ah, the Crusades - I should get my husband in here - he loves history. Not that I think they were right, but it's not exactly like the Crusaders just started attacking a peaceful nation that had never done anything wrong, either.

*reads some more* Yes, butterbeer, it may have been a "loaded" question, but it was 100% true. Of course Nurvi wouldn't want Amy to leave those kids I'm just trying to show a side of missionary life to you guys that I think you might not be aware of.

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

*reads some more* Yes, butterbeer, it may have been a "loaded" question, but it was 100% true. Of course Nurvi wouldn't want Amy to leave those kids I'm just trying to show a side of missionary life to you guys that I think you might not be aware of.

Thuis seems a bit condescending - since I am sure the MAJORIOTY - if not EVERYONE does know that missionaries do good work. Give me a break here - I'm sure most people know about Mother Theresa. However - many missionaries also use doing good as a way to recruitment and demand that the people they help go to their religious services. People should help - for the sake of helping - not as a way of recruitment.

Lief had used the term Pagan to describe non-christians in earlier days. Now I'm not saying that this wasn't a valid term. But I've always wondered - why is their god or their beliefs anymore invalid than Christian beliefs? Is the Christian god somehow more believable than Zeus or "mother nature"? I don't think so. They are all based on mythicism in one form or another.

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

*reads further* Ah, the Crusades - I should get my husband in here - he loves history. Not that I think they were right, but it's not exactly like the Crusaders just started attacking a peaceful nation that had never done anything wrong, either.

Of course it wasn't as easy as a group of evil people attacking a group of innocent people. The history of the world is way too complicated for that.
However, just because someone has attacked their neighbours in the past (or present) doesn't mean it's okay to sail accross the sea to attack them.
I know you're not saying the Crusades were okay. I just wanted to say that you can look at Crusades through the glasses of history and say that they were wrong.

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

*reads some more* Yes, butterbeer, it may have been a "loaded" question, but it was 100% true. Of course Nurvi wouldn't want Amy to leave those kids I'm just trying to show a side of missionary life to you guys that I think you might not be aware of.

Well I've finished The Poisonwood Bible now, what a moving book! I should just post a summary somewhere and get it out of my system. Then I can stop covertly trying to get you guys to read it.

My problem with missions is not the charitable work many missionaries do (obviously). In my "original" quote, I was separating the desire to do good works with the desire to show people Christianity. I don't see that they have to go hand in hand, that's all. (Though I can certainly see that Chistians would be inspired to do good works, it doesn't have to go with trying to convert people.)

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

I know you're not saying the Crusades were okay. I just wanted to say that you can look at Crusades through the glasses of history and say that they were wrong.

Actually - going by history - the crusades weren't necessarily wrong. What was happening was that muslims were trying to overthrow europe and had captured much of southern europe. In response - Europe fought back. But it was rthe muslims who first instigated the crusades.

[Nurvingiel]

Well I do think that the line between defending yourself and conquest was crossed. That's a part of the world with a history too complex for further comment though. (In this thread, at the moment, anyway.)

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Well I do think that the line between defending yourself and conquest was crossed. That's a part of the world with a history too complex for further comment though. (In this thread, at the moment, anyway.)

I don't see why this can't be discussed here. I also don't see how the line was necessarily crossed. The Muslims were trying to conquer Europe and Europe fought back. The muslims also were cutting off the holy lands from Christian pilgrims - this was also a cause for the crusades. All history is complex. People like to claim the crusades were racially motivated - but that is just the PC crap talking. There were a lot of valid reasons for the crusades also and it was more the muslim's fault.

[Nurvingiel]

There's two reasons I didn't want to elaborate here. One, because I don't really know enough about the subject to do it justice, and two, because even if you feel that religion was a motivator, I think we're really not talking about theology anymore.

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

of course there is also the case that the lands around what is now israel, syria, lebanon, jordan etc were holy muslim lands, and holy jewish lands, all three religions were fighting for the same piece which all three revered, and yet all three religions are under the same god, so it only serves to show that human nature singles out differences in others to create violence

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Last Child of Ungoliant

of course there is also the case that the lands around what is now israel, syria, lebanon, jordan etc were holy muslim lands, and holy jewish lands, all three religions were fighting for the same piece which all three revered, and yet all three religions are under the same god, so it only serves to show that human nature singles out differences in others to create violence

Yes - but one of the problems that occurred was the previously christians were freely able to go on pilgrimages to the holy lands - then the muslims cut that off and prevented it. So they wanted the holy lands all to themselves - instead of allowing the other religions to go on pilgrimages there.

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

although there was also persecution going on in andalucia, the christians were trying to get rid of the moors there,

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Last Child of Ungoliant

although there was also persecution going on in andalucia, the christians were trying to get rid of the moors there,

yes - but that was because Muslims were taking over southern europe - which that was part of. They were attempting to make their way into france and up into Germany, etc. The Muslim goal was to conquer Europe. The crusades was set into place to stop that from happening and restore the pilgrimages to the holy lands.

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

Lief had used the term Pagan to describe non-christians in earlier days. Now I'm not saying that this wasn't a valid term. But I've always wondered - why is their god or their beliefs anymore invalid than Christian beliefs? Is the Christian god somehow more believable than Zeus or "mother nature"? I don't think so. They are all based on mythicism in one form or another.

I can't say about Paganism or Greek mythology, but Christianity is in large part based on down-to-earth, day-to-day experience. It is a relationship, talking to God and hearing back from him. Telling him things I want to tell him, and hearing things back. Praying, and seeing the miracles occur. Hearing prophecies, and seeing them fulfilled. The experience of meeting Christ is mine. When I met Christ, the 'coincidences' in my life multiplied. My prayers were answered, my desires granted. When I had a concern and flipped the scripture open at random, the Bible passage would directly answer my concern. When I prayed that the Lord would give me a plot thread for my book writing, ideas would flood me as never before. One of my great experiences of Christ was when I discovered he'd been writing my book with me. This is one that I really love. I will present it to you, for you to debunk.


I was writing a fantasy book series called, "The Erinosad Series" for at least a year before I met Christ. I almost never picked up a Bible, if I could avoid it. I had read the Book of Revelation once, several years before, and enjoyed it. I'd forgotten just about all of its contents, though. Only one scene really stood out to me at that time, and that one doesn't even appear in my book. The Bible was the last thing in my mind while I was writing this fantasy book. I'd already written two large fantasy books already between this series and that reading of Revelation, none of which had Revelation parallels worth noting. However, the Lord divinely chose to cause my book to become a direct parallel of the Book of Revelation. When I started reading the Book of Revelation again, I was startled by the parallels I encountered. Allow me to bring up some of the parallels for consideration.

The gods

There were four gods, three good and one evil (a trinity-like concept). One of the gods was the leader. He was male, and he never participated physically in the events of the world (just as God the Father, according to Orthodox Christianity, can only be seen through the Son).

The second god was also good and male. He came down into the world to fight the evil god, who had entered the world earlier. They fought and the good god won. In this act of violence he smote the evil land as well, splitting the earth and making the whole evil land uneven. A great Elevation rose. The smiting of the earth is like Jesus' breaking the power of the grave, and his subservience to the leading god is like Jesus' to his Father.

The third was a goddess. She too was good. She represents to me the Holy Spirit, though most of what I did on her was after I'd already recognized the parallels that existed between my book and the scripture.

The fourth god was evil. He lived in "The Flame of Darkest Night," a volcano within the earth that was also a spiritual dwelling place, an evil temple that was a construct of black fire. He was defeated by Brell, the second good god, and his kingdom on earth defeated. He lingered within the volcano, which was his base of power (and very much like hell, I believe). When one of my main characters ended up entering this place, he woke up on a slab of black rock shaped like a coffin- a vivid portrait of the spiritual death people suffer who enter hell.

Places

The Flame of Darkest Night, I already brought up.

The Rainbow Castle is the place where the good wizards, the followers of Brell (the second god), live. The Rainbow Order is led by a council of leaders, who make decisions by vote. This council building is formed of three towers, standing upright from the middle of the castle. A rainbow comes from the top of each tower, and the three rainbows intersect in the middle of the tower triangle, in the air. The rainbows are sort of solid . People can walk across them. These towers are pure white and flawless, and the rainbows that intersect form one united core in the middle. To me, this is a wonderful representation of the Trinity, how the three are one. In Revelation, it talks about the elders of the people wearing crowns (the political authority of the Council Members of my book), white robes, and surrounding the White Throne of God. A Rainbow surrounded this too. These men of mine are called the Rainbow Order, they wear white robes and form a council that serves God.

The Demon Underground is a deep cavern in the earth I created. I hadn't read about the Abyss of R.A. Salvatore when I invented this, and I hadn't done much fantasy reading. Perhaps I may have gotten the idea somewhere; I don't know. Anyhow, in the scripture the place where the demons come from is an abyss, and so it was in this book too. This was invented without scripture being thought of. You could argue though that it influenced my thinking subconsciously, if you want.


The wizards of the Rainbow Order had white robes and magical powers. All wizards were either good or evil- there was no in-between.

With your permission, I will remove now from forming the set. What I've described so far has been a coincidental or subconscious or godly ordained set that mirrors Christianity.