Theology III

[Curufin]

Originally Posted by Azrael

i go to a baptist church but i do not give myself a denomination but if i had to give a name to what I concider myself it would be Jesus Freak

Sorry, but this sounds a little OMG!!!1JESUSLOLBBQ!111!!!

[Azrael]

I'll bring the Hot dogs!!!!! BBG!!! rock on!!!
anyways yeah. I did talk to my friends (also becoming a youth pastor) grandfather whose a pastor and he said that most youth of today are more into the bible then being a denomination, to tell you the truth why does their need to be denominations its a relationship with God not a popularity contest. Curufin I get what you many about that second church and sadly you are right. This is what I was talking about when i said american churches are becoming very corrupted...their sites are set on more money for them and more people then on what God wants...... but I know that, that is not what God is all about he even slams people like that in the gospels over and over calling them "snakes, white tombs..." and so on

[Lief Erikson]

Curufin, thank-you for sharing. I'd like to hear more.

So your belief system is based upon spiritual experiences, at least partly. That's the same for me. I agree with you that they are very convincing reasons to believe in a God.

Is your belief system based on more than the spiritual experiences?

Would you care to elaborate on why you feel God is all? Also, I'd be curious to hear what your moral values are and on what they are based, how you draw the line between morally good and bad things.

I agree with you that sex shouldn't be seen as dirty. But then, you'd probably see rape or pedophelia as in some way dirty. Some sexual acts might be considered dirty, even while sex itself, practiced as it should be practiced, is not dirty. We probably just draw the line in different places as to what kinds of sexual behavior are harmful.

I also see as very valid your criticisms of the focus some church members or leaders have on appearance and wealth, as opposed to the mission of the church to dedicating itself to being the love of God for the world.



I wish I understood better your point about the Gnostic Gospels being written in Aramaic. The Christian Gospels also were written in Aramaic at a very early date, and they're all dated to within the first century AD, within the lifespans of the original eyewitnesses, so I don't really know how this can make much difference. Also, IMO the closest friends of Jesus and the successors they appointed to pass on Jesus' teachings (that they themselves had taught these successors, from their personal experience of knowing Jesus) are the most reliable testimony available about what Jesus believed. Not a Gnostic group- the disciples and their successors roundly condemned the teachings of the Gnostics.

[Azrael]

Sex is good as God states it, but only when used in that way He intended. The reason Gods says no sex before marrige is because when two people come together in sex they become one (in God's eyes) and He wants that to only be with the one he choose for you and not some random person.

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

Rinke. People who crave ritual come in all flavors of spirituality, including various branches of the Wiccan 'tradition". Also, people who don't. It's not an innate characteristic of the practice.

[Curufin]

Is your belief system based on more than the spiritual experiences?

I don't quite understand. My beliefs are, of course, also based on study.

Would you care to elaborate on why you feel God is all?

Ah, an explanation of my pantheism! I guess this comes a bit from my upbringing, to be honest. When I was a little girl, before we started going to the Presbyterian church, and after we stopped going, my mother and father would get me and my brother up early in the morning (before dawn) and we would ride our bikes to the park nearby and watch the sun rise over the trees as we fixed breakfast. It was one of the most spiritual experiences of my life, watching the world come alive like that. I guess it was in those times that I began to see God/the Creator as everything around me. God was not just something distant and remote, but something in everything around me. God was in the birds that sang as the sun rose, in the rustle of the wind in the trees, in the rabbits that scampered along in the fields. The beauty of the world around me could be explained to my heart and soul in no other way than that the world itself - and everything in it - was divine, and no different than the Creator who created it in the first place. This was backed up by the Quaker theological teachings that claim that there is 'That of God in everyone' - which is easily morphed into 'That of God in everything'.

Also, I'd be curious to hear what your moral values are and on what they are based, how you draw the line between morally good and bad things.

Thats a very broad and difficult question. Perhaps you could specify which moral values you're most interested in? I'd be glad to answer, but I'm not exactly sure how to approach this question.

I agree with you that sex shouldn't be seen as dirty. But then, you'd probably see rape or pedophelia as in some way dirty. Some sexual acts might be considered dirty, even while sex itself, practiced as it should be practiced, is not dirty. We probably just draw the line in different places as to what kinds of sexual behavior are harmful.

Of course I see rape and pedophelia as wrong. I should have added 'between consenting adults' to my answer. I feel that sex between consenting adults is a beautiful gift. And you notice that I do not specify the gender of those consenting adults.

I also see as very valid your criticisms of the focus some church members or leaders have on appearance and wealth, as opposed to the mission of the church to dedicating itself to being the love of God for the world.

Amen. I think this is a big problem - many churches concentrate so much on building their own wealth that they forget the plot.

[Curufin]

Originally Posted by sisterandcousinandaunt

Rinke. People who crave ritual come in all flavors of spirituality, including various branches of the Wiccan 'tradition". Also, people who don't. It's not an innate characteristic of the practice.

I never meant to imply that they didn't, or that it was.

I was simply meaning to state that my Quakerism (which is adamantly anti-ritualistic) caused me to revolt a little against the ritualism in the brand of Wicca practiced by my friends.

EDIT: I have to go - I'm at my grandma's and can't tie up the phone line anymore! But I'll be on late tonight to continue the conversation.

[Coffeehouse]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

Though atheism really is completely irrational

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahaha!!! !!!!!!!

LOL!!! that's funny!!!

[Azrael]

It really is...... With all I 've seen I couldn't deny even for a second theres a God....but also I can't deny that He is a loving God....ooo hey topic idea (curufin said this first tho)

she said that God may not be a guy or may not be a woman..my opinion God is nether male nor female but a spiritual being with is so much different.....the reason I say HE is due to Jesus being man (If someone says Jesus could have been a woman you better back that up big time if you say it B/C that is a huge step)

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by Coffeehouse

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahaha!!! !!!!!!!

LOL!!! that's funny!!!

Actually, what's really absurd is the common myth that atheism is the rational perspective. You see, atheism is 100% blind faith. No one can prove a negative. No one could even provide the smallest bit of evidence that there is no God. There is no evidence against the existence of a God, and there never can be, so atheism is 100% blind. On the other hand, if any religion has even the smallest fragment of evidence supporting it, then it's more rational then atheism is, because even the smallest shred of evidence for a belief in some God (such as one person muttering that he has a strange feeling in his spine that he feels might be God watching him-- an absurdly small evidence) is more than an atheist ever can have to support his belief that there is no God. It's extremely absurd that atheism is seen as the viewpoint of the rational. It's the blindest faith that any can be. There is no evidence whatsoever to support it, and any religion that exists that claims to have any evidence whatsoever to support it is going to be more rational.

I'll respond to your post sometime today, Curufin, probably. I'm just a bit distracted and what you wrote will take some thinking.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally Posted by sisterandcousinandaunt

And your theory that each human has the choice or not to participate in Sin is not supported by Catholic teaching.

If you mean original sin, that is correct. I don't think Lief is saying that we can choose to be affected by the ancestral curse, or not, as we so choose. I believe he's referring to particular, personal sin.

This "we are all creators and destroyers" business is closer to Shaivism than any Christian doctrine with which I'm familier.

There's some truth in all religions.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally Posted by Tessar

Azrael, if you want to get into theology things like Dare 2 Share are a good place to start. But if you want to know the things Lief does you're going to have to take it another few steps .

Very true.

Check out the Catechism (not the watered down version--the real one), and go look up the names of a few theologians.

Out of curiosity, what do you mean by the "Watered down version" vs. "the real one"? Are you thinking of the Baltimore catechism as the "real one"?

I especially suggest St. Thomas Aquinas and have read a number of his works.

Yeah...I'm gonna have to disagree on that one. For one thing, St. Thomas makes a little uncomfortable. For another, you really need to have a decent grounding in philosophy before you can get into him. He's not something to just jump into.

I would more recommend Augustine.

I also suggest checking out biographies of saints (St. Theresa "The Little Flower" is a good saint to start with IMO), and going to the Vatican's website to check out sermons and things like that.

Indeed, St. Therese is great; in case you're wondering, Azrael, her autobiography is "Story of a Soul"; a spiritual classic.

It's wonderful to be able to communicate theology in a language that your average kid can understand, but it's like dumbing things down. You need to start with the dumbed down stuff some times but you have to graduate to a higher understanding at some point if you're truly interested in sharing your knowledge.

I very much agree with that, Tessar.

You can be a perfectly wonderful and charming person without knowing a drop of theology. And maybe you really don't need to have more than a minimal understanding of it to live happily.

No, you don't. People who are theologically learned can sometimes become kind of arrogant, and think they have the answer to everything, and furthermore, think that everyone else has to do the same thing they do. No, indeed.

(Not thinking of anyone here, more people at the school I go to.)

Of course the caveat stands that sometimes you wish you really didn't know these things .

As the world's most overquoted Church Father, St. Augustine, said, some thing which are true, ought not to be known by everyone. Some people just can't handle everything.

But seriously, if you're interested in having a deep knowledge of Christianity/Catholicism/Any other religion, there are a million texts out there that you can dive into and it will give you a much better understanding of how things work.

Yep. Reading is where you want to go. Something written before the twentieth century, preferably.

I'm sticking this here instead of in a PM in case anyone else had suggestions they'd like to make. Or if they disagree with me. That's fine too .

Whew.

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by Gwaimir Windgem

If you mean original sin, that is correct. I don't think Lief is saying that we can choose to be affected by the ancestral curse, or not, as we so choose. I believe he's referring to particular, personal sin.

Correct. While Original Sin creates a predisposition in us to sin, the choice to sin is always ours, personally chosen, so we're always personally responsible for all of our sins. We had the ability not to sin, each time we do it. We choose to participate in the sins of Adam and Eve through our actions. So it's wrong for us to cast the blame on Adam and Eve.

Originally Posted by Gwaimir Windgem

There's some truth in all religions.

Mm-hmm .

[Gwaimir Windgem]

I did talk to my friends (also becoming a youth pastor) grandfather whose a pastor and he said that most youth of today are more into the bible then being a denomination, to tell you the truth why does their need to be denominations its a relationship with God not a popularity contest.

Oh, Gawd almighty, where on EARTH do I begin? Hector? Lief? Somebody?

Curu: So, as I understand it, you could essentially be described as a low-church Wiccan?

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally Posted by Curufin

Well, technically, you are talking about a religion. Here's a definition of religion:



Seems to fit Christianity pretty well. Maybe from within this set of beliefs it seems like a 'relationship' to you, but from outside, it's very much the same as pretty much any other religion when it coems to that definition.

Nope, it's a religion from the inside, too. Hear also what St. James saith: "Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world."

Jesus Freak types tend to think that "religion" and "hypocritical legalistic corrupt mockery" are the same thing. Apparently, the holy Apostles disagreed.

Second - The Christian God is not my 'dad'. My dad is the one who raised me from birth and has been there for me through thick and thin. I do not see a Christian God in this manner at all. I do not even see 'God' as being male, but if God exists at all I see it rather as being androgynous.

Well, God is neither male nor female (at least through Godhead; from a Christian viewpoint, God the Son is male through his assumption of a male human nature, but God qua God is not). God has certain masculine aspects, and certain feminine aspects. God is most generally considered under masculine aspects, but sometimes he is referred to as "Mother", as well. Though as a traditionally-minded Christian, I feel one ought to be careful about that; it must be understood under the ratio of the incorporeal being neither male nor female, not through trying to make God into an empowering Goddess, as some Christians do.

Originally Posted by Earniel

I always thought the view 'God helps those who help themselves' as prevalent in Christian belief.

Christians with common-sense, yes. You can consider those a "break-off group", or not, as you please.

[Curufin]

Originally Posted by Gwaimir Windgem

Curu: So, as I understand it, you could essentially be described as a low-church Wiccan?

Gwaimir, yes, I think that's about right. With some tenents of Quakerism thrown in.

[Curufin]

Well, God is neither male nor female (at least through Godhead; from a Christian viewpoint, God the Son is male through his assumption of a male human nature, but God qua God is not). God has certain masculine aspects, and certain feminine aspects. God is most generally considered under masculine aspects, but sometimes he is referred to as "Mother", as well. Though as a traditionally-minded Christian, I feel one ought to be careful about that; it must be understood under the ratio of the incorporeal being neither male nor female, not through trying to make God into an empowering Goddess, as some Christians do.

I don't believe that God is male or female, but equal parts of each. My personal experience has been more with God's female aspect, but maybe that's just because I'm female and relate better. Both parts are equally important.

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

Originally Posted by Gwaimir Windgem

If you mean original sin, that is correct. I don't think Lief is saying that we can choose to be affected by the ancestral curse, or not, as we so choose. I believe he's referring to particular, personal sin.

Try this again on me, Gwai, and talk slowly. If you reject Universalism, but believe in Original Sin, then everyone is affected by Original Sin, thus, sinners. (except Jesus, kind of a special case) Thus, no choice, yes?

If you don't believe in Original Sin, and reject Universalism, then it would, theoretically, be possible for someone to choose not to sin?
Completely? Anyone on that list, yet?

[Azrael]

Originally Posted by sisterandcousinandaunt

Try this again on me, Gwai, and talk slowly. If you reject Universalism, but believe in Original Sin, then everyone is affected by Original Sin, thus, sinners. (except Jesus, kind of a special case) Thus, no choice, yes?

If you don't believe in Original Sin, and reject Universalism, then it would, theoretically, be possible for someone to choose not to sin?
Completely? Anyone on that list, yet?

yeah Jesus is on that list!

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

Originally Posted by Azrael

yeah Jesus is on that list!

You reject original sin, Az?