Page 1 of 22 12345611 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 324

Thread: Dear Mom, I put a couple of people in Hell today.

  1. #1

    Dear Mom, I put a couple of people in Hell today.

    Some folks say that even those who get sent to Hell are better off than those who are simply passed over--and I'm talking about those noble savages who never fit into the scheme to begin with. Being lifted out of an endless sea is better than being pulled under, but being pulled under is better than being passed over, because at least those unfortunate little souls have the benefit of being taken into account. The others are forgotten--left adrift. Would the Great Flood have served its purpose had it not sent countless numbers of people straight to hell?

  2. #2
    String Dancer Shea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    1,931
    Um..., I'm not exactly sure what you are talking about. If your talking about something like tribal people who live in remote places like in Africa or South America, scince the beginning of the NT, the Word still somehow gets to them (that is why we have missionaries). It is just up to them whether or not they want to beleive and obey.

    Acts 17:30
    In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent.
    Hwt! We Gar-Dena in geardagum,/eodcuninga rum gefrunon,/hu a elingas ellen fremedon!
    Oft Scyld Scefing sceaena reatum,/ monegum mgum, meodosetla ofteah,/ egsode eorlas, syan rest wear/ feasceaft funden; he s frofre gebad,/ weox under wolcnum, weormyndum ah,/ ot him ghwylc ara ymbsittendra/ofer hronrade hyran scolde,/gomban gyldan. t ws god cyning!

  3. #3
    There are still plenty of vast regions in S. America that have yet to be charted by civilized society. Westerners refer to it simply as the 'Green Inferno', and for obvious reasons seein' as how it's the most savage and insufferable place you could possibly imagine on the face of the earth. It is truly one of the few enviroments where cannibalism still exists in its pre-ice-age form. We can only speculate, though.

    As far as Missionaries go, I did a little research on the internet and I don't think anyone has yet led an expedition through that particular region--one could only imagine what their casualty rates would be. Anyway, I don't mean to sound 'matter-of-fact', but the notion that missionaries are numerous and effective enough to get their message through to every culture, let alone every member of that culture, veers on the side of absurdity. Believe it or not, there is a lot that religion will never be able to explain . . . but Blaise Pascal might have been on to something when he proved by statistical mathematics that it is infinitely better to submit to religion (that being Christianity, of course) than run the risk of being sent to Hell. He did manage to pull everyone's leg with his ridiculous logic (not many people truly understand how he came to this conclusion and how little sense it actually makes, but you can investigate that for yourself unless you really need me to explain it to you).

    If you study the history of the Catholic Church, I reckon' you'll find a lot of interesting parallels between the rise of Western Imperialism and the rise of Rome, which would eventually harbor the ever-important Roman Catholic Church. My advice--for whatever it's worth--is to try reading America's Shadow by William V. Spanos (I emphasize the word 'try', because it's excrutiatingly verbose). The first half of the book is a history of Western Imperialism, with its origins in the Roman Empire and its traces in Catholicism. What you learn you will find interesting, regardless of what you think the Truth may be.

  4. #4
    String Dancer Shea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    1,931
    Well, I don't mean to dissagree with your skepticism, but if God says that he commands all people to obey then I beleive that the Word gets to everyone at some point in their life.

    I have studied the history of the Catholic Church, even more so after I left it (my grandmother was a director of religious education and my grandfather was a decon in the Catholic Church). And though I don't agree with it as it conflicts with the Bible, I do like to study the history simply for the sake of history. I've been recently studying the 16th century Reformation, so when I get the chance I "try"-as you put it- America's Shadow.
    Hwt! We Gar-Dena in geardagum,/eodcuninga rum gefrunon,/hu a elingas ellen fremedon!
    Oft Scyld Scefing sceaena reatum,/ monegum mgum, meodosetla ofteah,/ egsode eorlas, syan rest wear/ feasceaft funden; he s frofre gebad,/ weox under wolcnum, weormyndum ah,/ ot him ghwylc ara ymbsittendra/ofer hronrade hyran scolde,/gomban gyldan. t ws god cyning!

  5. #5
    I'll start by saying that I, myself, was educated by Catholics for the better part of my youth. I think that no matter what it stays with you (once a Catholic always a Catholic, as the saying goes), so don't assume I am just out there trying to heckle you and undermine your personal beliefs. Maybe now you will listen to what I am saying instead of passing it off as radical 'skepticism'.

    Yeah, as far as God's Word goes . . . heh . . . I think people have exploited that 'justification' for long enough. Perhaps you are familiar with the Crusades? What an utter waste of human beings, all lost in the name of 'God's Word'. What else is there . . . hmm. . . . Divine Kingship! That's a nasty one; millions upon millions of lives lost as a result, and for what?

    Now, you'll probably point out that these are all atrocities committed by the Catholic Church, which you apparently are no longer a member of. But you said you are studying the history of the Reformation? Listen: look closely at the synchronized rise of Protestantism and Capitalism. Did you know that one of the first things the Protestants set out to do was abolish nearly all religious holidays? That went hand-in-hand with doctrine of Laissez-Faire Capitalism, which sought to increase the length and number of working days. Next thing you'll want to do is look at the Industrial Revolution (the first major Capitalist revelation). Though it goes without saying, the Catholics were seldom as brutal than the Industry owners were. Children working 48-hour bouts at a time in below freezing temperatures is just one particularly sad example (their average life expectancy rate was lower than what it had been in the Dark Ages--about 31 years old).

    This was ok with the Church becuz Thomas Malthus--a religious thinker--had already published a series of essays about how balancing the population level would require a reduction in the rate of birth. In other words, some people were destined to die (becuz the economy would not be able to sustain them). No big deal, the plantation owners were killing off slaves like they were going out of style (on account of the negroes being 'less human' than you or me and, therefore, 'doomed' to begin with).

    One Protestant that comes to mind when I think of raw brutality is Henry Ford. You might know of him if you drive a Taurus LX or a GT Mustang convertible, but what you might not know is that Ford was a Nazi patron. And I don't just mean patron as in 'supporter'--no, Ford gave millions and millions in money and resources to Hitler himself to rid the world of that inferior race of people: the Jews. But take my advice and keep that on the DL, becuz anyone who sez **** about Henry Ford (especially here in Detroit) gets an *** beating by Ford Motor Company thugs.

    Let this be a lesson in history.

  6. #6
    String Dancer Shea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    1,931
    I don't mean to pass off your statements as radical skepticism, but I do think that you are using historical religious attrocities as an excuse not to fully believe in the Bible. Which you have every right to, if that's what you want to believe. One thing that I have learned, through history and personal experience, is that if someone forces their religious beliefs on someone else, it's really not that second person's convictions it's the first's and that really is no good.

    For example, my little sister (who dosen't really belong to any church) announced this week that she is engaged. The family is very happy because he is a nice guy. When she told our Catholic grandmother, the first thing she said was NOT "Congradulations! I'm so happy for you!" but, "Will it be a Catholic wedding?" and "Will you raise your children in the Catholic Church?" My grandparents pushed Catholicism so much, that their children are weak Catholics and most of their grandchildren rebelled against it all together.

    I know that's an extremely minor scale example, but isn't that how most of those atrocities get started, by one group forcing their beliefs on another? That is not what the Bible teaches Christians to do. We are commanded to evangelize:

    Matthew 28:19-20
    Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in[1] the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

    But we are in no way to force people to beleive:

    Matthew 10:14
    If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town.

    Um.., I did want to point out about the abolition of religious holidays by the Protestants. I was wondering if that was just coincidence that it happened during the Capitalist movement, or it enhanced it, or something like that. The reason I say this is because Protestants abolished them because of this scripture:

    Galatians 4:9-10
    But now that you know God--or rather are known by God--how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? 10You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! 11I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you.

    Another case in point, before the Reformation, it was beneficial to be a beggar because the Catholic Church would take care of you in order to look good. But Martin Luther brought out this scripture:

    1 Thessalonians 4:11-12
    Make it your ambition to lead a quiet life, to mind your own business and to work with your hands, just as we told you, 12so that your daily life may win the respect of outsiders and so that you will not be dependent on anybody.
    Hwt! We Gar-Dena in geardagum,/eodcuninga rum gefrunon,/hu a elingas ellen fremedon!
    Oft Scyld Scefing sceaena reatum,/ monegum mgum, meodosetla ofteah,/ egsode eorlas, syan rest wear/ feasceaft funden; he s frofre gebad,/ weox under wolcnum, weormyndum ah,/ ot him ghwylc ara ymbsittendra/ofer hronrade hyran scolde,/gomban gyldan. t ws god cyning!

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Shea
    Another case in point, before the Reformation, it was beneficial to be a beggar because the Catholic Church would take care of you in order to look good.
    I just wanted to quickly address this one statement (I'll cover the rest of what you said later when I have more time, as this conversation has my curiosity piqued). The true beggars were the Catholic priests and bishops themselves, who taxed the people least able to pay more than anyone. It was actually quite unbeneficial to be a beggar, because, in most cases, it was a result of the Church's sale of indulgences to ease the pain of Purgatory (see my discussion 'Science and Literature' in the the Literary Forum). The whole thing was a kind of a paradox, but that's how the Catholic Church managed to escape criticism: they were helping to sustain the poorest segment of society (with lax efficiency), but it was because of the Church that those people had such an unfortunate plight. The

  8. #8
    String Dancer Shea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    1,931
    Try reading Martin Luther's biography Here I Stand by Bainton (his first name escapes me just now). He was one of the leading authorities on the Reformation.
    Hwt! We Gar-Dena in geardagum,/eodcuninga rum gefrunon,/hu a elingas ellen fremedon!
    Oft Scyld Scefing sceaena reatum,/ monegum mgum, meodosetla ofteah,/ egsode eorlas, syan rest wear/ feasceaft funden; he s frofre gebad,/ weox under wolcnum, weormyndum ah,/ ot him ghwylc ara ymbsittendra/ofer hronrade hyran scolde,/gomban gyldan. t ws god cyning!

  9. #9
    What a handy technique it is to assemble Bible scripture to form arguments in any way you see fit. Let me ask you a question. Do those passages actually mean what you say they do, or are you forcing your own interpretation on them? (Who can say for sure, right?) You're caught in a bind either way. Let me show you:

    You quoted 1 Thessalonians 4:11-12, which said that everyone has a responsibility to take care of themselves that way no one can hang a debt over anyone else's head--Individualism at its best. Just before that you quoted a vague passage from Galatians 4:9-10 which pointed out that we were wasting too much time 'observing special days and months and seasons and years' (though it is not exactly clear as to why). What are the 'weak and miserable principles' we are guilty of turning back on? My bet is they are the refusal to obey the High Command to 'win the respect of outsiders' by our daily lives' work (an essential Capitalist doctrine).

    But there is still a margin of indecision; after all, it could simply be a coincidence, right?. Actually, you just got done quoting two passages that reeked of Capitalism, so if anything is a coincidence it is the support of your arguments by Biblical scripture. But if it neither is a coincidence, then we can both agree that the Protestants are Capitalists and are, therefore, responsible for at least some of the atrocities committed in their own name. We may learn to forgive, but we must not forget. (It's a viscious circle, I know, but it helps us learn.)

  10. #10
    King of Plastic Spoons imthefoolonthehill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Lost in my own incoherence
    Posts
    2,378
    *Realizes that FOOL is way to lazy to read all this*
    *switches to different voice within head*
    *realizes that he doesn't have anything better to*

    Abdo Rhino: concerning post#1 "Some folks say that even those who get sent to Hell are better off than those who are simply passed over--and I'm talking about those noble savages who never fit into the scheme to begin with. Being lifted out of an endless sea is better than being pulled under, but being pulled under is better than being passed over, because at least those unfortunate little souls have the benefit of being taken into account. The others are forgotten--left adrift. Would the Great Flood have served its purpose had it not sent countless numbers of people straight to hell?"

    If you hold the Bible to be completely true, then you believe that there is no worse fate than to suffer in hell.

    The Flood of Noah would only have served its purpose if it fulfilled every duty that God wanted it to. One of those duties was to wipe the sinfull people off the face of the earth. They had angered God, and he wished to punish them...

    So... if it was part of God's plan (and biblically everything is, I think) for the flood to send those people to hell, then it couldn't have fulfilled its purpose if it didn't.... or am I missing something?


    anywho.... on to Shea's #1 post.... lol I have no real right to barge in like this... but we are the proud, the many, the bored.


    I am not going to quote it....

    Wasn't it Paul who said that nature was evidence enough? and that even those who hadn't heard the gospel were responsible for not responding to that evidence?

    I can't remember if that is accurate, perhaps Shea has a refference.

    AbdoRinbo post #2: What does your name mean? Why did you pick it?

    anyway... I agree... missionaries have not reached all regions.

    *wonders if anyone cares what I think*
    *decides that no, probably no one does*

    Shea's 2nd post: Are you sure it is THE WORD that gets to people? What if someone has divine revalation without the word.... and that is his way to 'truth'.

    AbdoRinbo post #3 : yeah... the stuff we learn in our youth is hard to discard. I skipped over most of what you said... but I wonder what it is like to play the conversation game like a chess game.... AbdoRinbo does it well... with anticipating moves and such....

    Not an insult or critisism, mind you, but rather a note of admiration.

    Shea's post #3: at this point my old foolish voice within my head begs me not to read the entire post.... *wonders if Shea's words apply to AbdoRinbo's post.... since I didn't read all of the last one*

    What? the "abolition of religious holidays by the Protestants"

    Please elaborate... I think it is mostly athiests who are pushing for that... not protestants.


    AbdoRinbo's post#4: Um... are you sure most beggers were poor because of indulgenses? I mean... isn't that kind of far-fetched?

    The..................................?

    Shea's post #4: short&sweet... I can't even comment on it.

    AbdoRinbo post #5: I am confused by this post... everything seemed so calm and nice and almost resolved....

    oh wait... I get it... he was going to respond later... and now is later... mmmm now&laters... mmmmmm sticky goodness....

    anyways...

    Capitalist doctrine??? WTH???

    "win the respoect of outsiders by our daily lives' work" first of all... that doesn't really make sense... and secondly, how the hell is that an essential capitalist doctrine? thirdly... are you one of those um... for lack of a better word... whackos that think that everything is a capitalist conspiracy?


    You seemed intelligent... before all that crap about capitalism.............. Protestants are capitalists....what does it have to do with ANYTHING? I have met Protestant commies and Catholic capitalist.... I do not see the connection between religion and capitalism.

    *smiles* *with a Southern accent,"* you saound like a Red, boay, we better bahrn you at da stake mmmhm. Gahd Dayam commies anywhay, simplay cayan't abhide deez foaks anymohr.



    Seriously, though... "Protestants are capitalists and are, therefore, responsible for at least some of the atrocities commited in their own name."

    Honestly, I don't know whether to laugh, cry, or be disgusted.... I think I will be disgusted...

    There is a gap in your post where common sense or reason should be.
    Told by a fool, signifying nothing.

  11. #11
    . . . Sigh . . . Let's look at this line-by-line . . . (Fool, you ****er ).

    If you hold the Bible to be completely true, then you believe that there is no worse fate than to suffer in hell.

    The Flood of Noah would only have served its purpose if it fulfilled every duty that God wanted it to. One of those duties was to wipe the sinfull people off the face of the earth. They had angered God, and he wished to punish them...

    So... if it was part of God's plan (and biblically everything is, I think) for the flood to send those people to hell, then it couldn't have fulfilled its purpose if it didn't.... or am I missing something?
    Just re-read what it says carefully. Everyone who goes to Hell suffers the worst fate imaginable, but some souls never had a chance at salvation(e.g., a person born into an indigenous tribe in Abyssinia in the late 19th century, before it was surveyed)--they were doomed to begin with. Likewise, for the Bible to make any sense at all some people have to go to Hell. That's what I was driving at, though it wasn't really an important point. The real debate sprang from that simple idea.

    anyway... I agree... missionaries have not reached all regions.
    Which underscores my point entirely.

    yeah... the stuff we learn in our youth is hard to discard. I skipped over most of what you said...
    You should read it all, otherwise I'll just repeat things I've already said when I try and form a response, and we'll get bored.

    What? the "abolition of religious holidays by the Protestants"

    Please elaborate... I think it is mostly athiests who are pushing for that... not protestants.
    I'm proud of you, Fool. Anyway, you've (unknowingly?) raised an interesting point. Were the Protestants who pushed for the abolition of unnecessary religious celebrations actually atheists working under a facade? It depends on who you ask, but whichever way you look at it the self-proclaimed 'Protestants' (whatever their motives were) wanted to oust excessive religious holidays from the calendar.

    Um... are you sure most beggers were poor because of indulgenses? I mean... isn't that kind of far-fetched?
    My apologies, I was kind of vague when I tried to explain to Shea the connection between Purgatory and the infestation of people's lives by the Catholic Church. 'They were helping to sustain the poorest segment of society (with lax efficiency), but it was because of the Church that those people had such an unfortunate plight' was about the extent of my explanation. You are familiar with the connection between Purgatory and Indulgences, right? Indulgences were prayers for people suffering in Purgatory that could be bought for oneself in this life or bought by one's family for one who was already deceased. No matter, because the aristocracy stood such a slim chance of making it into Heaven at all, they invested vast amounts of money into these prayers. Now, if you know anything about economics, when enough people with such large quantities of money give it all away, it puts a huge strain on the market (otherwise there might be more jobs available). The Church was sucking the continent dry and there were huge masses of people who were forced to beg just to get by. A lot of the money the Church received whent into Cathedrals and other monuments to further their 'cause', which really only caused the devastation to increase and become more widespread.

    Capitalist doctrine??? WTH???
    This is a very sensitive topic for you, I can tell. Perhaps you should stop and think for a while (just as I did) before posting a quick response. Hours--and sometimes days--went by before Shea and I had a chance to respond to each other. You've got to give yourself time to swallow and inwardly digest it all.

    OK . . . Let's start. "Win the respect of outsiders by our daily lives' work" was the quote you chose to attack. Fair enough. Take a look at the original quote:

    1 Thessalonians 4:11-12
    Make it your ambition to lead a quiet life, to mind your own business and to work with your hands, just as we told you, 12so that your daily life may win the respect of outsiders and so that you will not be dependent on anybody.

    How on earth could the Protestants be Individualists? (It was Luther who utilized that quote, after all.) Three things stand out when I read that passage: 1) the second-person perspective 2) the distintion between personal 'business' and that of 'outsiders' 3) the concern for individual work. It's as though this passage was a warning to 'outsiders': laissez faire! (Fr. 'hands off').

    what does it have to do with ANYTHING? I have met Protestant commies and Catholic capitalist.... I do not see the connection between religion and capitalism.
    A Protestant Communist is about the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard of. A Catholic Capitalist is understandable, the Vatican is a much more liberal power now than the Catholic Church was during the Renaissance--or the Dark Ages, for that matter. I was merely trying to point out that the Reformation coincided with the rise of Laissez-Faire Capitalism. That's it. There is a link between the two, and the 'work ethic' of Protestants during the 19th and early 20th century was shockingly exploitative. That sort of religion teaches us to be passive, to overlook our suffering now in the hope of being freed to go play in Paradise for all eternity.

    My assumption is that you learned everything there is to know about Marxism on Fox News. Do yourself a favor, throw your TV out the window and burn the Communist Manifesto, both are garbage. You'll learn nothing about Marxism from either of those. One popular misconception about Marx is that his theory predicted the standard of living would gradually decrease. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, Marx's theory (from Das Kapital) said the very opposite--that the standard of living would increase, which is what has happened. However, (and I tend to agree with this) Marx believed that the standard of living and the value of human life are inversely proportional. In other words, as the standard of living increases, the value placed on human life--for it's own sake--is reduced as we become part and parcel of the Capitalist machinery at work (literally, tools). Think on that for a while.

  12. #12
    King of Plastic Spoons imthefoolonthehill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Lost in my own incoherence
    Posts
    2,378
    Ok... Wait... I am still unfamiliar as to which protestants and which religious holidays....

    No need to apologize about the beggar issue....

    Yes, I am pretty sure I know what indulgences and Purgatory are.....

    I know nothing of medeivil economics... so I will have to take your word for it when you talk about the strain on the market etc etc...

    "1 Thessalonians 4:11-12
    Make it your ambition to lead a quiet life, to mind your own business and to work with your hands, just as we told you, 12so that your daily life may win the respect of outsiders and so that you will not be dependent on anybody."

    If that were a capitalist doctrine... it wouldn't say, "Make it your ambition to lead a quiet life" It would say, "Make it your ambition to become incredibly wealthy by being a cutthroat businessman."

    It is in no way a threat to outsiders... anyone with eyes can see that. It is in no way bearing ill will towards outsiders, because it obviously must be worthwhile for Christians to attempt to gain their respect....


    "A Protestant Communist is about the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard of."

    I agree... any Christian who is communist is absolutely ridiculous... in fact communism in general is absolutely ridiculous... and my spelling is heinious... did I even spell ridiculous right? is it rediculous??? agh...

    Your assumption makes an *** out of you... and me... probably... "My assupmption is that you learned everything there is to know about Marxism on Fox News"....

    Your assumption is wrong... I learned most of what I know about Marxism and Communism from the Communist Manifesto, and several Communist party web sites (the British Communist party, mostly)....

    I agree that the COmmunist Manifesto is garbage...

    you said, "one popular misconception about Marx is that his theory predicted the standard of living would gradually decrease. NOthing could be further from the truth. In fact, Marx's theory (from Das Kapital) said the very opposite-- that the standard of living would increase, which is what has happened"

    WHAT? Yes, I know what Marx predicted... but it didn't happen, it fell through the roof like a flaming meteor. The standard of living in Russia may have increased from the age of the Czars, but they still couldn't feed their own people. It was pitifully low in Russia. It was also pitifully low in all the European countries that
    'converted' to communism. Show me a communist country with a good standard of living, and I will show you a country that is only communist in name. ex. China.... Threw out all the communist economics and is now more of a tyrannical Oligarchy than anything else.

    Oh by the way, Fox News and CNN are on the same par, both hideously biased... only on different ends of the yardstick.

    PS...

    I am impressed with your ability to keep your cool... even after my deliberate attempt to piss you off.... gj!

    Told by a fool, signifying nothing.

  13. #13
    I'll respond to the rest of it later, but for now I just wanted to point out a misunderstanding on one side of this debate. 'Yes, I know what Marx predicted... but it didn't happen, it fell through the roof like a flaming meteor. The standard of living in Russia may have increased from the age of the Czars, but they still couldn't feed their own people. It was pitifully low in Russia.' I said the standard of living would increase in a Capitalist nation. I think you misunderstood me and thought I was referring to a Communist state. (Marx was a student of Capitalism, and he supported Communism only by implication since all Das Kapital is is a study of Capitalism.) Anyway, would you agree with me that the standard of living for nearly all Capitalist countries has risen over the past 400 years? I know you like to object to everything I say.

    Your assumption makes an *** out of you... and me... probably... "My assupmption is that you learned everything there is to know about Marxism on Fox News"....
    Sometimes it's ok to be an ***.

  14. #14
    King of Plastic Spoons imthefoolonthehill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Lost in my own incoherence
    Posts
    2,378
    I OBJECT! (but only as a matter of principle)

    Lol... I think every country in the world has rissen in living standards in the past 400 years...... I can't think of one that hasn't.... so therefore, yes, all capitalist countries have rased their standard of living over the past 400 years.
    Told by a fool, signifying nothing.

  15. #15
    String Dancer Shea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    1,931
    Ok, well, since I'm not really interested in politics or economics (and since it usually winds up locking a thread anyway), I would just like to say that I agree with you imthefoolonthehill (it is so hard to type your name without hitting the spacebar) when you said:
    Wasn't it Paul who said that nature was evidence enough? and that even those who hadn't heard the gospel were responsible for not responding to that evidence?
    Actually it comes from the first chapter in Romans. In the letter, Paul has been talking to the Jews and the Gentiles and during the verses in chapter 1:18-32, he rebukes those Gentiles who worships the creatures rather than the creator. Because they didn't have the law, God gave them the laws of nature.

    Romans 1:20-27
    20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
    21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.
    24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen.
    26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

    (Hmm... I wonder if the Episcopal leaders have ever seen those last two verses.)

    There was so much talk of politics that I got confused, I think that you guys might have resolved the issue about the verse from 1 Thessalonians. If not please restate your stance on it.

    As far as the scripture in Galatians 4 about religious holidays, the point that I was trying to make was that no where in the Bible are we commanded to observe holidays as part of a religious doctrine. Now, if you want to celebrate your birthday, the 4th of July, whatever, that's perfectly fine because they are not religious holidays. You can even exchange gifts or do an egg hunt during the usual times of the year. But I'll never wish anyone a Merry Christmas (I say "Happy Holidays"), or Happy Easter. Neither will I dress up as a goblin. Whenever I celebrate these holidays, I take out all religious connotations to it because God didn't tell us to have any, period.

    I think I got everything.
    Hwt! We Gar-Dena in geardagum,/eodcuninga rum gefrunon,/hu a elingas ellen fremedon!
    Oft Scyld Scefing sceaena reatum,/ monegum mgum, meodosetla ofteah,/ egsode eorlas, syan rest wear/ feasceaft funden; he s frofre gebad,/ weox under wolcnum, weormyndum ah,/ ot him ghwylc ara ymbsittendra/ofer hronrade hyran scolde,/gomban gyldan. t ws god cyning!

Page 1 of 22 12345611 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Images of Heaven and Hell
    By Miss Darcy in forum Religious Texts
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 05-11-2008, 09:46 PM
  2. John 1:12
    By KarenM in forum Religious Texts
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 01-10-2005, 07:44 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •