Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

dogma wrote:

JEB_Stuart wrote:Can you name which ones? I have never heard of them, and most of the sects of Eastern Orthodoxy simply the national churches.

A standard component of Eastern Orthodoxy is the untenable nature of God's existence. The rest follows organically.

JEB_Stuart wrote:
Who believe that Christ is the Son of God, per their SoF:http://www.ucc.org/beliefs/statement-of-faith.html

Read beyond the initial statement.

Also, once you acknowledge God as the Father of all, you can cancel the significance of God as the Father of Jesus.

JEB_Stuart wrote:
As do the Disciples, per their SoF:http://www.heartofeugene.org/AboutOurChurch/AboutDisciples.htm

Never read the UDC statement of faith. Was going on my conversations with their Head Disciple.

JEB_Stuart wrote:
Which aren't a sect, but rather dissidents with Church teachings...

But are Christians. Given the subversive tendencies within the faith, they still count. Also, I never brought up the notion of sects. That was Frigs. Again, emotionally incapable of rational thought on the matter.

JEB_Stuart wrote:
Quakers are different...some would even say heretical. It is hard to point to them and say, "They believe this," simply because you can't. Many Quakers do believe in the divinity and orthodox view of Christ, although they certainly wouldn't state it as such. But some don't. Again, it is impossible to label them one way or another simply because of their strange structure and affiliation.

Obviously, but the point of the initial comment was to elucidate the difficult inherent in classifying Christianity as a faith which requires that one belief in the genetic relationship between Jesus and God. I don't need to prove that Quakes lack that belief in homogeneity, only that some Quakers lack that belief.

JEB_Stuart wrote:It isn't a tenet at all...

Nope. Its actually blasphemy.

Yea... I'm "emotionally incapable" hehe

You seem to like this phrase... I'm not sure you know what it means

It was a reference to my earlier comment. Hence the word 'again'. Though I can see how you might construe it as an attack on JEB.

Incidentally, based upon your poor English, I doubt very much that you know the meaning of any of the more esoteric words you choose to use

I find strange organisms in my Peanut Butter all the time. I just eat them. They scream and scream, and beg their little microscopic deity for forgiveness for their sins right up into the moment I crap them out. This entire thread is a waste of computer processing power.

Actually I am dyslexic and I also have a Masters In Physics.

Thanks

I'm glad your ad hominem is working.

dogma wrote:

JEB_Stuart wrote:Can you name which ones? I have never heard of them, and most of the sects of Eastern Orthodoxy simply the national churches.

A standard component of Eastern Orthodoxy is the untenable nature of God's existence. The rest follows organically.

But the Eastern Orthodox does recognize the major ecumenical councils as the definition of the Faith. No Eastern Orthodox priest or even a common adherent would even think of agreeing that Jesus in not the Son of God. They would agree that such as thought as part of any group that claims to be Christian would be blasphemous....

dogma wrote:Read beyond the initial statement.

Also, once you acknowledge God as the Father of all, you can cancel the significance of God as the Father of Jesus.

They acknowledge the Nicene Creed as a basic definition of the Faith, which clearly labels Christ as being the Son of God and also being one with God, ergo Christ is God, just a different facet.

dogma wrote:But are Christians. Given the subversive tendencies within the faith, they still count. Also, I never brought up the notion of sects. That was Frigs. Again, emotionally incapable of rational thought on the matter.

Most Catholics, especially the clergy, would not regard these people as Catholics then, and in accordance with the orders as laid out in Papal Bulls and Encyclicals, those people are excommunicated from the Church. They are outside the realm of Christendom for all intensive purposes.

dogma wrote:Obviously, but the point of the initial comment was to elucidate the difficult inherent in classifying Christianity as a faith which requires that one belief in the genetic relationship between Jesus and God. I don't need to prove that Quakes lack that belief in homogeneity, only that some Quakers lack that belief.

Well the first five ecumenical councils really laid out the framework for what the Faith is. It is widely regarded and agreed that those who reject these councils are not Christians....

dogma wrote:Nope. Its actually blasphemy.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

warpcrafter wrote:I find strange organisms in my Peanut Butter all the time. I just eat them. They scream and scream, and beg their little microscopic deity for forgiveness for their sins right up into the moment I crap them out. This entire thread is a waste of computer processing power.

Then don't read it and waste our time with your pithy comments...

frgsinwntr wrote:Actually I am dyslexic and I also have a Masters In Physics.

Cool story bro.

frgsinwntr wrote:
Thanks

I'm glad your ad hominem is working.

Yep, that is ad hominem. However, if you had studied anything relating to logic, you would know that ad hominem is not necessarily invalid.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JEB_Stuart wrote:But the Eastern Orthodox does recognize the major ecumenical councils as the definition of the Faith. No Eastern Orthodox priest or even a common adherent would even think of agreeing that Jesus in not the Son of God. They would agree that such as thought as part of any group that claims to be Christian would be blasphemous....

My experience tells me otherwise. You could argue via a criterion of elimination, but then we're getting into no true Scotsmen territory.

JEB_Stuart wrote:
They acknowledge the Nicene Creed as a basic definition of the Faith, which clearly labels Christ as being the Son of God and also being one with God, ergo Christ is God, just a different facet.

No they don't, they accept it as valid information. Again, read the statements of faith. I've been in this Church for my entire life (my father is part of their theological council), and what you're saying has very little to do with the UCC.

JEB_Stuart wrote:
Most Catholics, especially the clergy, would not regard these people as Catholics then, and in accordance with the orders as laid out in Papal Bulls and Encyclicals, those people are excommunicated from the Church. They are outside the realm of Christendom for all intensive purposes.

You can claim that, however my knowledge of the more liberal churches within the larger Catholic Church speaks against it.

Again, you're treading very close to no true Scotsmen territory.

JEB_Stuart wrote:
Well the first five ecumenical councils really laid out the framework for what the Faith is. It is widely regarded and agreed that those who reject these councils are not Christians....

By those of certain orthodox persuasions.

To answer the OP.

Yes.

Do I believe in the fantasy wizard a.k.a, Harry potter, Gandalf version, No. However there are people that dabble in satanism and witchcraft and therefore could be classified as wizards and witches.

Demons are very real.

I also believe in Angels too.

GG

dogma wrote:

JEB_Stuart wrote:It isn't a tenet at all...

Nope. Its actually blasphemy.

Yes, yes it is. But not for the reasons you'd be told today by modern Muslims.

Watch that Peanut Butter video again. When he takes the top off the jar, foil on the PB is already peeled back a little. Looks like they felt the need to check that there was no new life in there before they shot it....

The OP video is such a terrible attempt at propaganda, Whats up with the crazy voice they gave the guy reading the bible? thats not biased....

Also how do you draw a logical line between two verses, one written by a man well after the death of Christ, and the other translated in a chain from 3-4 languages into English, and then claim that to not believe in them is pan amount to denying your whole religion.

And if I was going to make an argument about witches and demons, I would take it upon myself to learn the cultural meaning of the words for the time period in which the verse was written before I made and ass of myself by equating it with a resent pop-culture phenomanon (by the way he also missed the fact that there are no demons in HP).



Now as for the peanut butter guy, that is at the opposite side of the propaganda war, and was no better argument than the video from the OP.

FITZZ wrote:Well,no I don't belive so,however,to the best of my understanding,it isn't a basic tenet of Islam to belive Muhammad is the son of god.

It's not, but in either case it's a religion founded on a prophet. In one case there's a much larger group of people who think that prophet is the son of god as well.

Platuan4th wrote:

dogma wrote:

JEB_Stuart wrote:It isn't a tenet at all...

Nope. Its actually blasphemy.

Yes, yes it is. But not for the reasons you'd be told today by modern Muslims.

Explain...

Witches and Wizards? No
Daemons? Most definately.

I heard an old guy tell a story about one of his friends who was preaching on a street corner. There was a small crowd around him. One of the men passing by was a college professor. He approached the preacher, gave him his card and said "I challenge you to a debate this sunday." The preacher took the card and invited the man to stand with him. He said he would accept the debate on the condition that he bring along someone who had been delivered from alcoholism after discovering that there was no god, someone who had been freed from a life of prostitution, someone who was dying of cancer and got healed because there was no god, etc. The man quickly said he no longer wished to debate the preacher.

Regardless if that story is completely true, exaggerated or completely false, it makes a good point. In the same way, so does scripture. Yes, there's weird crap in there, but a lot of stuff in our culture would have really freaked out ancient Jews too. I believe in the supernatural and have experienced it in both positive and negative ways. I have enough circumstantial evidence to believe for myself, and I believe it's hard if not impossible to force someone else to believe in it too.

Witches and wizards? Yes. Magical powers for the aforementioned? No. Demons? No.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:someone who was dying of cancer and got healed because there was no god

Both sides of this one are mythical.

I don't like the underlying message in thet story, that being that faith and learning are mutually exclusive.

Well, then if witches and wizards and demons are all works of fiction and fantasy(as the narrator says) and that works referencing them are works of fiction, then that means most history, psychological, and some laws are fiction. I think ireland or scotland had a law stating that it was illegal to pretend to practice wiccan, witchcraft, etc. If this is so, then all Irish or Scottish laws are in fact fiction, and any country that has people attempting to practice witchcraft are indeed fiction. Not only that, but that entire movie is fiction as it references witches, wizards, and demons more than several times.

Also, it fails to take the fact that fat and blood of animals were useful back then to many people. If god had said "give me your cadillacs" to a group of recently freed slaves, then it really wouldn't of related to them. Also, nice work quoting the old testament, most christians pay more attention to the new testament anyways.

George Spiggott wrote:Witches and wizards? Yes. Magical powers for the aforementioned? No. Demons? No.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:someone who was dying of cancer and got healed because there was no god

Both sides of this one are mythical.

I don't like the underlying message in thet story, that being that faith and learning are mutually exclusive.

It's not saying that at all, nor am I saying to treat every word as the most utmost truth. The academic group often opposes itself to the religious group just for the hell of it, and vice versa. Doesn't mean there has to be any animosity, just pointing out that there is.

There are records of people being dead, being prayed for then not being dead anymore. There are doctor's records to prove it. I've known a hell of a lot of people with "incurable" diseases that turned to a religious source for help and suddenly didn't have the disease anymore. I'm not going to bother trying to convince you because it's a waste of my typing, and I'd much rather type about toy soldiers or other such nonsense


Automatically Appended Next Post:

halonachos wrote:Well, then if witches and wizards and demons are all works of fiction and fantasy(as the narrator says) and that works referencing them are works of fiction, then that means most history, psychological, and some laws are fiction. I think ireland or scotland had a law stating that it was illegal to pretend to practice wiccan, witchcraft, etc. If this is so, then all Irish or Scottish laws are in fact fiction, and any country that has people attempting to practice witchcraft are indeed fiction. Not only that, but that entire movie is fiction as it references witches, wizards, and demons more than several times.

Or the law that gave every town in America schools which was called the "Old Deluder, Satan Act." It said something to the effect that Satan would try to delude the minds of the young, so they should stay busy by learning things. Not that it gets mentioned anywhere anymore.

Exactly, so the belief that children should be in school is a piece of fiction.

Wow that video was fething offensive. It was totally made to stroke anti christian egos. I couldn't even finish it. This is about as objective and productive as me making a video where I just repeat the phrase; "every one who disagrees with me is stupid".

The part about the ram's blood was a Jewish ritual. While he's at it, why not insult every religious practice? Theres plenty more religions to piss on, Islam, hinduism, shinto, bhuddism, etc. I think the guy who made this vid just has a grudge against christianity. I don't believe in Islam, but I don't run around telling muslims the quran is a poorly written storybook.

He's not even right about anything in that video though. There are several people I know who call themselves witches and are in ways of practicing wiccan. Not to mention there are people who practice witchcraft and voodoo so I will say that witchery and wizardry exist. There have been confirmed possessions so I will say that demons exist. Seeing as though they exist, the bible is NOT a work of fiction and therefore everyone should be christian.

Also, the video should've ended with "share this video with others... so that they can laugh at you for even bringing up this piece of garbage." or perhaps "successful troll is successful".

halonachos wrote: There have been confirmed possessions so I will say that demons exist.

What do you mean by 'confirmed'? There have been confirmed cases in which certain types of dementia have been explained by certain people as the work of possession, but that doesn't necessarily mean the person was actually possessed.

halonachos wrote:
Seeing as though they exist, the bible is NOT a work of fiction and therefore everyone should be christian.

That's a rather long bow to draw. Even should something like a demon be proven to exist, its existence would not be a necessary endorsement of Christianity.

There are only certain cases that the catholic church investigates, those deemed worthy of exorcism are to me a confirmation of either possession or a really messed up haunted house.


The second statement you quoted me on was a shot at the video's idiocy. I was mimicking it this time, don't worry I'm not that stupid, yet.

dogma wrote:What do you mean by 'confirmed'? There have been confirmed cases in which certain types of dementia have been explained by certain people as the work of possession, but that doesn't necessarily mean the person was actually possessed.

Well there is an order of the Roman Catholic Church that deals with exorcisms, but I am not sure how much of their work is documented....

dogma wrote:That's a rather long bow to draw. Even should something like a demon be proven to exist, its existence would not be a necessary endorsement of Christianity.

I don't think that you can say Christianity can be proven, so I disagree with that statement, but I do believe everyone should be a Christian. If any of you find it intolerant that is too bad, but it is a basic tenet of my faith and I adhere to it. That being said, I am not going to start up any inquisitions or anything of that nature, but I do love talking about God and the Bible, among many other things, and would be more then happy to answer any questions via pm.

JEB_Stuart wrote:I don't think that you can say Christianity can be proven, so I disagree with that statement, but I do believe everyone should be a Christian.

I believe that not everyone should be a Christian. Now where do we go?

JEB_Stuart wrote:

dogma wrote:What do you mean by 'confirmed'? There have been confirmed cases in which certain types of dementia have been explained by certain people as the work of possession, but that doesn't necessarily mean the person was actually possessed.

Well there is an order of the Roman Catholic Church that deals with exorcisms, but I am not sure how much of their work is documented....

dogma wrote:That's a rather long bow to draw. Even should something like a demon be proven to exist, its existence would not be a necessary endorsement of Christianity.

I don't think that you can say Christianity can be proven, so I disagree with that statement, but I do believe everyone should be a Christian. If any of you find it intolerant that is too bad, but it is a basic tenet of my faith and I adhere to it. That being said, I am not going to start up any inquisitions or anything of that nature, but I do love talking about God and the Bible, among many other things, and would be more then happy to answer any questions via pm.

I gotta agree with you Jeb, I too believe everyone should be christian, the world would be a lot gentler, friendlier place. We'd have a lot less to argue about. However, I think forcing it on anyone would be the worst thing a person could do, (totally not saying that you advocate it, just pointing it out) I'm a big believer in personal freedom and idividuality so if someone doesn't want to believe in God, I'd let them do as they please. Oh well, in a perfect world we'd all get along and people wouldn't post slowed propaganda on youtube.

Ahtman wrote:

JEB_Stuart wrote:I don't think that you can say Christianity can be proven, so I disagree with that statement, but I do believe everyone should be a Christian.

I believe that not everyone should be a Christian. Now where do we go?

Nowhere?

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:I heard an old guy tell a story about one of his friends who was preaching on a street corner. There was a small crowd around him. One of the men passing by was a college professor. He approached the preacher, gave him his card and said "I challenge you to a debate this sunday." The preacher took the card and invited the man to stand with him. He said he would accept the debate on the condition that he bring along someone who had been delivered from alcoholism after discovering that there was no god, someone who had been freed from a life of prostitution, someone who was dying of cancer and got healed because there was no god, etc. The man quickly said he no longer wished to debate the preacher.

Regardless if that story is completely true, exaggerated or completely false, it makes a good point. In the same way, so does scripture. Yes, there's weird crap in there, but a lot of stuff in our culture would have really freaked out ancient Jews too. I believe in the supernatural and have experienced it in both positive and negative ways. I have enough circumstantial evidence to believe for myself, and I believe it's hard if not impossible to force someone else to believe in it too.

This is a fun argument....

I know plenty of people who "found" god and still died of cancer... still are prostitutes (well strippers).... and are all about drinking!
I also know people who have no god and still got healed... aren't alcoholics anymore... and aren't still stripping...

So... yea your story doesn't make any point... It says "look at these wonderful things!" only God can do that...

Well no... if it is true and only god can do that then... if we find one person who is godless that fits that criteria... your entire argument and story fail...

however your second part interests me...the part I highlighted.... What evidence did you find?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Hordini wrote:

Ahtman wrote:

JEB_Stuart wrote:I don't think that you can say Christianity can be proven, so I disagree with that statement, but I do believe everyone should be a Christian.

I believe that not everyone should be a Christian. Now where do we go?

Nowhere?

Hordini for the win!

Ahtman wrote:

JEB_Stuart wrote:I don't think that you can say Christianity can be proven, so I disagree with that statement, but I do believe everyone should be a Christian.

I believe that not everyone should be a Christian. Now where do we go?

To the bar for a pint? I don't have a problem with people who disagree with me. I am not an intolerant person, and I love meeting people with different perspectives. It gives me more to think about

Norwulf wrote:
, I too believe everyone should be christian, the world would be a lot gentler, friendlier place. We'd have a lot less to argue about.

Hmm.. huge swathes of history would suggest otherwise...

..but that could just be us violent Euro trash.

frgsinwntr wrote:So... yea your story doesn't make any point... It says "look at these wonderful things!" only God can do that...

Eh? I don't think it did.

It looked like it was saying that belief in God has done more for people's well-being than a lack of belief. It never implied no one ever had their life made better without converting to Christianity, that would be nonsensical.