Continuation of Christianity debate.

[CrazyAnglican]

Cya Symmetry,

You seem to be open-minded and well read. I hope you get back to the forum soon.

I think OnlyAmbrose had the point exactly. I've heard the argument of the "Eye of the Needle" being the night gate in Jerusalem (made for a man to walk through, but not a camel). I see two problems with it, which might lead us off the subject.

#1 A prickly English teacher type of thing to notice, but I'm an English
teacher so I noticed. Each of these Holy Bibles (KJV, NRSV, LB, NIV)
all use the indefinite article "a" needle instead of the definite
article "the" needle. This suggests that Jesus was talking about any
needle, not a specific needle in which case "the" needle or "that"
needle would make more sense. Basically, I think Jesus was
saying "If you're trying to get into Heaven, while worrying about
material things, you may as well try pulling a camel through a
needle's eye. It'll be easier"

#2 The meaning of the needle is less important though if you include the
next few verses. They go something like this:

The disciples were confused and asked "Lord then who can be
saved?" Jesus looked at them and said "Among men it is
impossible, but with God all things are possible. I tell you that
anyone who gives up mother, father, wife, land, (essentially
family and property) to follow me will be repaid a hundredfold.
The first among you shall be last and the last among you shall be
first."

Basically, I've had it pretty easy, and I'm pretty much caught up in material things. I pay my mortgage note, don't let the family go hungry, even splurge on something nice every now and then. So, in Heaven there are going to be slaves and martyrs, whom I step aside for and view with reverence. They will have earned my respect for the lives they lived, and I will be happy to acknowledge them. More importantly, I won't get there at all if I don't try to share what I have now. It is important though that Jesus states "the first will be last and the last will be first" still saying that through faith in God a rich man may get into Heaven, but not with the accolades of one who really suffered and was still faithful. So, when we get to Heaven, don't look for me at the front of the line. I'll probably be about 7/8th's of the way back with a big group of other Americans. I'll be happy to be there nonethess though.

[OnlyAmbrose]

2) Slavery is a word with a fairly fixed meaning. The fact that slavery in different cultures has followed different customs and rules doesn't detract from it's enormously evil nature.

How is slavery evil?

I expect to take a lot of flack for that statement, but I'm dead serious. Calling it evil presumes that it takes something away from you which is very important. In the context of religion, freedom and material possessions are not very important. They can, in fact, be harmful.

Some people are surrounded by crime, and drugs, and gangs, whilst others aren't.

Certainly, but notice that one of Jesus' closest friends was a prostitute?

Jesus had the advantage of being tempted only once, while others are tempted every day.

Not entirely true, in that Jesus was tempted just as much as we humans are. The story of His temptation is just more direct in that he went into the desert so the devil himself could tempt him.

We believe that Jesus suffered the same temptations and desires as any ordinary human does.

(although Christianity has a long history of equating poverty with vice and sin in the past few centuries)

Examples? Most of Christianity's greatest figures equate poverty with spiritual splendor. Mother Teresa anyone? Jesus Himself, of course.

The Catholic orders you mentioned require poverty, but the Catholic church is immensely wealthy.

True, but the idea is separation from material things. As a Norbertine, for instance, you are not allowed to own anything. All your "possessions" belong to the church.

But I see your point in that it may be easier to believe in Christ on a full stomach.

On the other hand, it's a lot easier to rely on Christ with an empty one.

You seem to have got almost the right message from the parable you repeated, which is impressive given that you don't seem to have thought about the story.
Don't let someone tell you the answer. Think about it.
A camel can never fit through the eye of a needle. The meaning of the story as you told it is- "A rich person can never get into heaven"

Oh, I've certainly considered this before.

But how else could a camel fit through a needle except with help from God?

Issue is, most rich people don't think they require help from God. Again, it's easier to rely on Christ when you can't rely on yourself.

edit- though now, reading anglican's post, looks like he got all the same points I did.

[MeDeFe]

That's one thing I never understood, WHY should a good, moral, rich person have to give up everything he has in order to be "saved"? As I see it such a person can do a lot more while he still has his money, but if he gives it all away at once, what then? One good deed and he's out of resources for helping further. As I see it a wealthy person who makes sure that the poor in the city where he lives get a meal every day does a lot more good than someone who gives every one of them 1000$ just to become as poor as they are.

Yes I know, someone's going to say "you can't buy your way into heaven" or something. But if that god is as benevolent as everyone says, shouldn't he approve of helping others? And the more the better.




As for slavery, Ambrose, if freedom is of no importance and might even be harmful, then it gets difficult, however, think of it like this: "Thou shalt not steal", and what is slavery but robbing a person of his freedom?

[OnlyAmbrose]

That's one thing I never understood, WHY should a good, moral, rich person have to give up everything he has in order to be "saved"? As I see it such a person can do a lot more while he still has his money, but if he gives it all away at once, what then? One good deed and he's out of resources for helping further. As I see it a wealthy person who makes sure that the poor in the city where he lives get a meal every day does a lot more good than someone who gives every one of them 1000$ just to become as poor as they are.

Yes I know, someone's going to say "you can't buy your way into heaven" or something. But if that god is as benevolent as everyone says, shouldn't he approve of helping others? And the more the better.

Let's remember that the Bible is clear that we are NOT saved by works. We are saved by faith, and that faith is justified through works.

But the point is that just donating to charity isn't going to save you. You need to accept Jesus Christ as your savior. You need to recognize the fact that you are nothing without Him. That you are helpless if you don't have Him. It's difficult for someone materially well-off to recognize that. They have no material problems, so they don't look to see their spiritual problems.

As for slavery, Ambrose, if freedom is of no importance and might even be harmful, then it gets difficult, however, think of it like this: "Thou shalt not steal", and what is slavery but robbing a person of his freedom?

So far as I know, in the Biblical context, it is not robbery of freedom, it is payment of a debt. If someone can't pay what they owe, they make up for it with 7 years of slavery (or something along those lines).

[luns101]

That's one thing I never understood, WHY should a good, moral, rich person have to give up everything he has in order to be "saved"?

The Bible says no such person exists. There's no such thing as a good/moral person...

Romans 3:10-11: "As it is written: There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God."

Romand 3:19: "Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God."

Galatians 3:22: "But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe."

As for slavery, Ambrose, if freedom is of no importance and might even be harmful, then it gets difficult, however, think of it like this: "Thou shalt not steal", and what is slavery but robbing a person of his freedom?

Slavery as practiced in our country was heinous and unjust . I don't agree with those who are trying to link the slavery in the Old Testament with what happened in America (and other Western nations). The abolitionist movement in the U.S. was chock-full of Christian believers wanting to eliminate slavery (...the pro-slavery forces in the South also tried to justify slavery from the Bible as well). By the end of the American Civil War, Abraham Lincoln was beginning to realize that the country was being punished by God for its mistreatment of African slaves. I could talk more about it, but this article does a much better job of articulating my position on it...

http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/368

[OnlyAmbrose]

I don't agree with those who are trying to link the slavery in the Old Testament with what happened in America (and other Western nations).

Just out of curiosity, who's doing that?

edit- and good post:

The Bible says no such person exists. There's no such thing as a good/moral person...

Romans 3:10-11: "As it is written: There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God."

Romand 3:19: "Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God."

Galatians 3:22: "But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe."

Note the de-emphasis on what we do.

[luns101]

I don't agree with those who are trying to link the slavery in the Old Testament with what happened in America (and other Western nations).

Just out of curiosity, who's doing that?

Page 71, Guiscard & Daddy1Gringo were arguing that point.

[CrazyAnglican]

That's one thing I never understood, WHY should a good, moral, rich person have to give up everything he has in order to be "saved"? As I see it such a person can do a lot more while he still has his money, but if he gives it all away at once, what then? One good deed and he's out of resources for helping further. As I see it a wealthy person who makes sure that the poor in the city where he lives get a meal every day does a lot more good than someone who gives every one of them 1000$ just to become as poor as they are.

I think this particular parable is more about making material things your focus, and that that's not good. Many of the sins that we talk about are basically good things (ie the blessings of God: food, shelter, clothing and more) that are taken to an extreme.

I don't think this parable is saying "If you are wealthy, you are evil". Instead it seems to be saying "Be generous to others and don't get tied up with material things to the point that they become your focus." At no time, in this parable, does Jesus say that anyone is going to Hell merely because they are rich. He is, however, saying that the suffereing of the poor and downtrodden will be met with justice. For me it's a warning to do exactly what you have said. For my brother it was an invitation to leave a comfortable career in Chicago and live as a monk in Tblisi. I'm quite sure that he will be repaid for the things he has given up when he reaches Heaven. I don't begrudge him that, he has chosen a tougher life than I have.

Yes I know, someone's going to say "you can't buy your way into heaven" or something. But if that god is as benevolent as everyone says, shouldn't he approve of helping others? And the more the better.

He does, and Jesus said many times and in many ways to look out for the poor. As far as rewarding this behavior though, think of it like this. A man writes a check to a local charity for an incredible sum of money. This one check will keep the charity going for five years. Then another man comes up right behind him and gives his pocket change. Is the second man as worthy of praise as the first? God blesses us all of the time; he gives us every breath. What accolade can I really expect when I run up and write a check (no matter how much it may seem to me) when compared to that. So, I agree, God does expect charity from us toward the poor, but when we fulfill this expectation we are not worthy of any special favor in God's sight. We are just doing what he would like us to do.

As for slavery, Ambrose, if freedom is of no importance and might even be harmful, then it gets difficult, however, think of it like this: "Thou shalt not steal", and what is slavery but robbing a person of his freedom?

I think the term indentured servitude would come in handy here. The slavery, as Ambrose has said, in Judea was not permanent and slaves seemed to have rights (as Unriggable pointed out in the Books of Law). Like Guiscard said, the slavery in surrounding countries was very harsh. By contrast, the Jewish system seems very much like indentured servitude (much like Jacob entered into to marry Ruth). Now whether slaves in Judea and Isreal were treated any better in practice than in any other country I have no idea. It at least shows some movement toward the modern idea that slavery is wrong though. The laws of God said that slaves had some rights and that slavery was not to be permanent. Even in Rome and Greece, where slavery again was different; Paul was concerned about the treatment of slaves and how a Christian slave should treat his master as well.

[Jenos Ridan]

To be honest, I just can't take the Bible seriously. It talks about God loving every individual and then spends several chapters in Exodus talking about slave rules. Doesn't make much sense.

Remember that the "slavery" in Old Testament culture, as that in the Roman empire later, was very different from the horrific institution that African Americans suffered in the South of the U.S. Slaves had rights and could earn and buy their freedom. It was basically a way to survive if you lost everything financially.

No. It wasn't. The type of slavery present in the ancient near east in the Old Testement period involved the wholesale deportation of peoples from their homelands, against their will, as well as the separation of husbands and wives in some cases, and also the slaughter of children to make the 'journey' easier. I studied ancient Assyria and Babylonia a great deal as an undergrad, and nearly made it my specialist subject...

The more of your posts I read the more I become convinced you are entirely dis attached from any kind of historical reality...

To understand the Old Testament consept of 'slavery' (ie: debt servitude), one must actually read the scripture in question. Or are you just that biased? Just because the Assyrians, Egyptians and Babylonians did slavery that way is not indictitive of how the ancient israelites did it.

[Jenos Ridan]

However, that is the slavery that God prescribed, not the one that Israel actually practiced. But don't place their inability to live up to God's standards on God.

Yeah, and not only in that area, but many others. Is it any wonder that there are so many skeptics out there? Jesus says one thing, and his followers pervert it and alter it...all the while justifying it with the very scriptures that they're supposed to be obeying in the first place. People aren't attracted to hypocrisy...they're attracted to holiness and consistent love.

Is there any one path that isn't filled with those kinds of gaps though, given man's infallibility and unwillingness to be wrong?

Faith. To have it, you can't rationalize it the way one normally would. Anybody can follow the 'rules' by knowing them. But it is a change of heart that really brings out the genuine belief. In fact, when you read the Bible, that is the only belief. All else is lies.

[Jenos Ridan]

Finally, if you take the idea that physical and spiritual freedom are seperate entirely, then you reduce Christianity to an aristocracy. Those who have easier lives will face fewer spiritual crises. Much as I admire people who come through their problems and strengthen their faith, it's easier to lead an upright life if you have the money.

This is absolutely false though!

It is easier to lead a visibly more upright life if you have the money. But in the heart is a different story. Let's recall a Bible story.

Some rich guy walks up to Jesus and he says "Hey what do I have to do to get to Heaven?"

Jesus says "Follow the commandments."

The guy says "Sure. I do that."

Jesus says, "Oh, and give everything you hold dear up for my sake."

The guy says, "Oh, nvm. See ya."

Jesus turns to his disciples and says, "Poor guy. He has so much stuff that doesn't mean a gosh-darned thing that he doesn't care much about stuff that really does matter. It's going to be about as easy for people like him to get to Heaven as it is for a camel to fit through the head of a needle."

Poverty is at the heart of Christianity. The fewer material possessions you hold dear, the more room you have in your heart for Christ. There's a reason why most Catholic religious orders require vows of poverty.

That said, you'd think that slaves, who have no possessions and a hard life full of suffering, are the most likely to enter the kingdom of Heaven.

The last shall be first and the first shall be last, after all.

Don't worry about the things of the body; God has got the bases covered in spades.

[Capt Killroy]

this is to all non believers. look at it this way you live your life according to the bible and when you die you will make it to heaven, ok now lets say their is no heaven and when i die i just lie in the ground and rot, their is no heaven but while i was here i lived a clean life i did not kill anybody or steal or f*ck anybody over ,now when i die people will say that i was a good person and he did his best and his children are good people to they are nice to others .now theirs you!! and you lie steal cheat or maybe kill someone and when you die people say the world is a much better place now that your gone .your kids are in jail or living in a shit hole because they have no family values now which life would you rather live me being a believer will have a good life free from the bullshit that you subject yourself to so think about it and i'll pray for you

[got tonkaed]

this is to all non believers. look at it this way you live your life according to the bible and when you die you will make it to heaven, ok now lets say their is no heaven and when i die i just lie in the ground and rot, their is no heaven but while i was here i lived a clean life i did not kill anybody or steal or f*ck anybody over ,now when i die people will say that i was a good person and he did his best and his children are good people to they are nice to others .now theirs you!! and you lie steal cheat or maybe kill someone and when you die people say the world is a much better place now that your gone .your kids are in jail or living in a shit hole because they have no family values now which life would you rather live me being a believer will have a good life free from the bullshit that you subject yourself to so think about it and i'll pray for you

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascals_Wager

there are some of the refutations for this argument within the link along with the basic outline.

I really just cant be sure that Odin shouldnt be the God i should follow instead of the judeo-christian one. Or be certain much on the nature of God to allow this type of thinking to determine whether or not i should compell myself to believe in one. Though if that works for you and your able to live a better life because of it, then that is good that it works for you.

[vtmarik]

Faith. To have it, you can't rationalize it the way one normally would. Anybody can follow the 'rules' by knowing them. But it is a change of heart that really brings out the genuine belief. In fact, when you read the Bible, that is the only belief. All else is lies.

Faith is not a path, it is the quality of being that allows you to see the path.

What you're talking about is the infallibility of the Bible (which in my opinion is suspect) which brings one along a path to Christianity.

The Bible really only takes you along one path, and so it is not quantifiably the same as faith. Following instructions in a book, whether or not your doing it to avoid hell or to live a "Christian Life" is no more personally validating than going to church every Sunday because that's what you've always done.

My point was that there was no one singular path that is free from the corruptive nature of Man, and Man's unwillingness to be wrong when it comes to spiritual matters. It doesn't take faith to follow instructions, it takes faith to look beyond the Book and to find another path.

[daddy1gringo]

Man, what page was this thread on? Talk about proof for the resurrection!

[unriggable]

this is to all non believers. look at it this way you live your life according to the bible and when you die you will make it to heaven, ok now lets say their is no heaven and when i die i just lie in the ground and rot, their is no heaven but while i was here i lived a clean life i did not kill anybody or steal or f*ck anybody over ,now when i die people will say that i was a good person and he did his best and his children are good people to they are nice to others .now theirs you!! and you lie steal cheat or maybe kill someone and when you die people say the world is a much better place now that your gone .your kids are in jail or living in a shit hole because they have no family values now which life would you rather live me being a believer will have a good life free from the bullshit that you subject yourself to so think about it and i'll pray for you

Christ, it's not like all atheists are rapists or drunkards or serial killers. We still have values. It's human nature to be compassionate and give and care about family, unless you're a sociopath.

[2dimes]

Rockafella, it's not like all christians are rapists or drunkards or serial killers. We still have values. It's human nature to be compassionate and give and care about family, unless you're a sociopath.

[unriggable]

Rockafella, it's not like all christians are rapists or drunkards or serial killers. We still have values. It's human nature to be compassionate and give and care about family, unless you're a sociopath.

Who's he?

[2dimes]

America's first billionare. Owner of standard oil and the guy that had Rockafella plaza built.

[unriggable]

America's first billionare. Owner of standard oil and the guy that had Rockafella plaza built.

Oh I thought you were referring to a username.

[2dimes]

No, sorry. I was struggling to decide who to use too. Hitler and Roosavelt made the short list, JD edged them out.

[salvadevinemasse]

If we forbid jay, backglass, vt marik, and Rev. Kyle from posting, it should be ok

<yawn> I have come to realize you cant argue with the insane, and if you believe in magical beings....you are.

*POUNCES YOU* I MISSED YOU!!!!!!!

[Syrae_Universe]

If we forbid jay, backglass, vt marik, and Rev. Kyle from posting, it should be ok

<yawn> I have come to realize you cant argue with the insane, and if you believe in magical beings....you are.

*POUNCES YOU* I MISSED YOU!!!!!!!

Lol WHUT DID I MISS! 8D

Anyways... seeing that the place is as still random as ever, decided to pop my head in and just quickly check.

Out again. Laters~

[salvadevinemasse]

If we forbid jay, backglass, vt marik, and Rev. Kyle from posting, it should be ok

<yawn> I have come to realize you cant argue with the insane, and if you believe in magical beings....you are.

*POUNCES YOU* I MISSED YOU!!!!!!!

Lol WHUT DID I MISS! 8D

Anyways... seeing that the place is as still random as ever, decided to pop my head in and just quickly check.

Out again. Laters~

Backglass is an old buddy of mine is all! Way back when I reined as master poster! lol. *hugs you cyn*

[unriggable]

Proof that the newer conquerclub is so much less intelligent