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.

Mormons are a branch of christianity. They're just a little 'off the beaten track'.

@Manchu:
Unfortunately, not everyone can pull off that stunt of rising from the dead. After the point about Jesus...well to be honest you kina lost me. What did that have to do with God choosing not to stop evil-doers?

Also, I think you were being a bit too extreme their with the whole 'well-fed' slave thing. Was it not your choice in the first place to willingly become a slave? (aka productive member of society ) Rights and your freethinking will are two different things.

Nevermind the paradox, that was only a cheeky attempt to boggled some minds. (which I notice you didn't answer )

dogma wrote:My father is a Christian minister and theologist who considers Mormonism to be a component of the larger Church. I know of many other theologists with similar positions. While the Trinity may be widespread, it certainly isn't something which is discussed explicitly within the Bible.

In certain circles the church as Body of Christ is considered to include Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc, but not as Christians. Either you are not stating your father's position with adequate clarity or your father needs to look over the Nicene Creed again. Also, Christianity is not derived from the Bible. It's a simple point that is often overlooked but the Christian faith existed for quite sometime before the bishops got around to deciding what would make up the canon.

So wait? What IS christianity?

Is it whatever the Nicean Council declared? Or is it about Jesus? (the two may overlap, but meh)

At the time, there were many churches that recognised Jesus as the Messiah, but not his divinity. (which I don't remember in any prophecies either)

Emperors Faithful wrote:@Manchu:
Unfortunately, not everyone can pull off that stunt of rising from the dead. After the point about Jesus...well to be honest you kina lost me. What did that have to do with God choosing not to stop evil-doers?

Remember the story of Jesus in the desert being tempted by Satan? (I assume you've heard the Gospel at some point or at least are generally familiar with it.) One of the things that Satan says is "if you're really the Son of God, throw yourself off this high place and surely God will save you." Now the idea is not that this literally happened (maybe it did, who knows, that's beside the point) but rather that Satan's temptation represents the idea that God's existence should be premised on our ability to "test" it by having no bad things happen to people in general but especially not to the faithful. But this is a misunderstanding of faith, of God's relationship to humanity, and of humanity itself. As I said, human beings are free. If God went around "stopping" evil-doers we would no longer be free. And then what would it mean to do good? Good that is not chosen is not good. Not moral good anyway. It can still be a practical good, like having food. But this isn't the same thing as morality.

Manchu wrote:

Ahtman wrote:You have trouble understanding things outside your own narrow views don't you?

FLAME WARRRRRR! Not taking the bait.

It isn't bait; it is an observation. One that increasingly seems more accurate all the time.

Ahtman wrote:

Manchu wrote:

Ahtman wrote:You have trouble understanding things outside your own narrow views don't you?

FLAME WARRRRRR! Not taking the bait.

It isn't bait; it is an observation. One that increasingly seems more accurate all the time.

Still not biting.

There are a lot of posts on here, and indeed many people I have talked to IRL, that indicate "what I believe God to be", without any context to refer to, except their own feelings. At it's heart this is true rebelliousness, in that I won't accept Gods word or plan so I'll just make up whatever makes me feel good based on my own understanding and experience. A true absence of faith. This is why a lot of people turn to the "eat drink and be merry, for tomorrow we may die" philosophy.

We forget that our lives on earth are incredibly short. It's amazing that I'll turn 39 next year. It seems like just yesterday I was 16 and playing D&D/star fleet battles etc.etc. with not a care in the world. The reason I mention our short lives, is that our limited understanding of life and God needs to be looked at in context of how short our existance really is. Can we really fully understand the motives and desires and intents of an All Powerfull God?

God has intentionally left things murky so that we would have to use faith. Christianity teaches that the earth is under a curse, this is why things are the way they are when it comes to human suffering. God chose to do this as part of his ultimate plan. I don't fully understand why. An ant doesn't understand why the lawn mower knocks down their hill every once in a while either. To them it just happens and they deal with it.

GG

You read Camus! And then looked at some Magritte. Those things aren't British!

I've never read Camus. He smells like garlic. But Magritte, yeah big fat deal.

I've never claimed to be a British Supremacist! I happen to like a great many things that aren't British - like hugging, and brushing my teeth.

I believe that everything, everywhere is interconnected - nothing is 'truly' superior to anthing else. The cup of Tea I'm drinking (at any given moment) could conceivably contain atoms from Hitler's moustache. Atomically speaking, in the grand scheme of things my trousers could just as easily be a dinosaur.


A fairly small one.

generalgrog wrote: Christianity teaches that the earth is under a curse, this is why things are the way they are when it comes to human suffering.

I agree with most of what you said (especially the distinction between obedience to Tradition and "whatever I feel like" religion) but it's not the case that Earth is under a curse. The "fallen" state of the humanity (not the world at large) indicates its incompleteness. But that, in the context of the Gospel, is not a "curse." Rather it emphasizes man's yearning for salvation in Christ. That is why people used to refer to the fall by saying "oh happy fault!"


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, the idea is not that we need to be content with ignorance but that the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus provide us with knowledge (perceived with faith) of the destiny for which we were created and our ability to achieve it.

Emperors Faithful wrote:So wait? What IS christianity?

Wiser heads than ours have written tomes on this topic. Personally, I think the best explanation I've seen was presented in the book "Mere Christianity" by C.S. Lewis. It is an excellent read for anyone trying to choose between Christian denominations, or anyone that finds themselves turning against a particular sect.

-edited for grammatical correctness.

Manchu wrote:

generalgrog wrote: Christianity teaches that the earth is under a curse, this is why things are the way they are when it comes to human suffering.

I agree with most of what you said (especially the distinction between obedience to Tradition and "whatever I feel like" religion) but it's not the case that Earth is under a curse.

Gen3:17(KJV)And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;

But the fall of man is also a curse, and more specifically the "Law of sin and death", Paul talks about in the book of Romans.

GG

Since the thread seems to have jumped from "is there a god" to something to do with religion; I'll provide you all with Agnosto's views of major world religions.

Judaism:
Our way or the highway. An elite club that your mom had to be a member of if you want to legitimately join. Sons of Abraham.

Motto: Hey we were all kicked out of eden so let's make everyone's life hell because of it.

Christianity:
A guy, 2000 years ago, thought he would preach peace and try to break the stranglehold that the Jewish clergy had on the populace. He thought of himself as a teacher and unfortunately some of his words were misinterpreted like "son of god" because really, if humans were made in god's image, wouldn't we all be children of god? People loved him and took it a little too literally.

Motto: Someone somewhere is having fun, let's go stamp it out.

Islam:
Pretty much a mish-mash of Christianity and Judaism with the exception that they believe that Mohammed was the last profit of God, not Christ or Abraham, or whoever.

Motto: We're right, you're wrong; we'll kill you because we don't agree. Oh yeah, lock up your women.

Buddhism:
Based upon a rich guy that got sick of his wife and kids and decided to walk the earth. He picked up some things along the way and tried to convince everyone that there's not just one way to do things.

Motto: Life sucks but you can always upgrade if you try not to kill each other.

Honestly, if you're going to be religious there're better religions out there, religions that don't espouse murder and genocide because you don't agree with each other. I recommend giving Shinto a try; gotta love a religion that honors the family and personel cleanliness.

agnosto wrote:Since the thread seems to have jumped from "is there a god" to something to do with religion

Intentional irony?

@GG: Be careful of literal interpretations of the Bible or even non-literal personal interpretations.

I'm a pinball, I don't do anything intentionally and I dare you to prove that I do.

Manchu wrote:
In certain circles the church as Body of Christ is considered to include Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc, but not as Christians.

Obviously, as they do not accept Jesus as the Messiah.

Manchu wrote:
Either you are not stating your father's position with adequate clarity or your father needs to look over the Nicene Creed again. Also, Christianity is not derived from the Bible. It's a simple point that is often overlooked but the Christian faith existed for quite sometime before the bishops got around to deciding what would make up the canon.

But apparently it is decided by the Nicene Creed, which was created much later. Would you like me to bring pre-Biblical gnosticism into the conversation? Or perhaps Unitarianism?

You're confusing your own testament of faith with history, and reality. All that's required to be Christian is the acceptance of Jesus as the Messiah. Everything else is ancillary theological posturing.

dogma wrote:

Manchu wrote:
In certain circles the church as Body of Christ is considered to include Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc, but not as Christians.

Obviously, as they do not accept Jesus as the Messiah.

Manchu wrote:
Either you are not stating your father's position with adequate clarity or your father needs to look over the Nicene Creed again. Also, Christianity is not derived from the Bible. It's a simple point that is often overlooked but the Christian faith existed for quite sometime before the bishops got around to deciding what would make up the canon.

But apparently it is decided by the Nicene Creed, which was created much later. Would you like me to bring pre-Biblical gnosticism into the conversation? Or perhaps Unitarianism?

You're confusing your own testament of faith with history, and reality. All that's required to be Christian is the acceptance of Jesus as the Messiah. Everything else is ancillary theological posturing.

You also have to accept his teachings. It depends on the denomination.

I'm just looking for the kind of minimal definition used to set up a category. If there were no people in the who professed Christianity, but did not profess belief in the Trinity I might agree with Manchu. However, there are people in the world that do so. So I don't.

For me its a matter of all or nothing. We can either reject all the various scripture as illegitimate to the determination of one's Christianity, or we can accept it all as legitimate. Either way we end up in the same place.

I'm just saying that statement doesn't actually work for a lot of Christian sects/persons.

It isn't meant to. Its a sort of lowest common denominator.

Wow it took me a half hour to read through all of that... im gonna have to stop coming here.

To return to the OP, someone who is essentially Atheist and believes there might be a god is an Agnostic: "There MIGHT be a God, but we don't know".

i.e. Not an atheist (there is no God at all)

IMO either of these ideas is to be prefered to (organised) religion.

Herohammernostalgia wrote:To return to the OP, someone who is essentially Atheist and believes there might be a god is an Agnostic: "There MIGHT be a God, but we don't know".

i.e. Not an atheist (there is no God at all)

IMO either of these ideas is to be prefered to (organised) religion.

Give you one guess what my beliefs are.

dogma wrote:
You're confusing your own testament of faith with history, and reality. All that's required to be Christian is the acceptance of Jesus as the Messiah. Everything else is ancillary theological posturing.

Dogma, how come you understand christianity better than 90% of those who belong to the religion?

Because his handle is dogma, duh.

agnosto wrote:Because his handle is dogma, duh.

Silly me. I should have recognized the simplicity.

youngblood wrote:Silly me. I should have recognized the simplicity.

@Dogma: While I agree that many people subscribe to the idea of a lowest common denominator in terms of acceptance as a Christian, that LCD is the Nicene Creed. Religions such as: LDS, RLDS, Jehovah's Witness, etc. are definitively not Christian. Take a closer look at their faith and you will understand why. Just because some has the same name for something, that doesn't mean it is the same thing. Almost all the churches I have ever been to, and trust me that is plenty all over the world, acknowledge the authority and wisdom of the first 7 ecumenical councils. Those council's took place because of things like gnosticism, which you pointed out, arianism, nestorianism, etc. as they were heretical, and ultimately unhealthy for the Body of Christ. That is why the creeds were introduced as the basic requirements of the Faith. They give the terms and definitions that are prerequisite to membership in the Body of Christ.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

youngblood wrote:Dogma, how come you understand christianity better than 90% of those who belong to the religion?

While I find this to be a bit cynical, I am hard pressed to disprove it. To my undying shame and embarrassment, many Christians do not comprehend Scripture, Tradition and Theology very well. Much of it is based on emotion. Truly saddening.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Can we avoid the long random-ass-structure posts tblock, one is enough...

Manchu wrote:

Ahtman wrote:Fixed that for you. Should avoid speaking of Christians as if they all think the same and act the same. It is an extremely varied group with radically different beliefs and approaches to the faith between groups.

Not so much as people like to claim who have not bothered to take a serious look at theology. (It's no use trying to claim that you have. If it was the case, you would not have made that statement with regard to the revelation of God in the person of Jesus.) I think you'll find that the the Doctrine of the Trinity is one of the definitive elements of Christianity. Those who speak of Jesus but not the Trinity, like Mormons, do not consider themselves "Christians" as such and are not considered to be so by Christians.

WTF DAKKA!!! WTF!?!?!?!?!?!?!

Excuse me for a moment... FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU...

Now, seriously??? WTF?

First, check this out:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/267750.page#1153984

It's OK, I'll wait...
...
...
...
...
...
...
OK, everyone read it? Good, let's continue.

Some here in forum know that I am spiritually ambiguous. I follow no religion but I try to study and understand all... When I see people twisting facts or misinterpreting doctrine in general, I like to step in and set the record strait.
Now, I happened to be raised Mormon, so blanket statements like that strike a chord on a personal, family level...

Mormon's believe in the God Head, a fancy word for the Trinity. Here, watch this vid from their website to see for yourself:
http://www.mormon.org/mormonorg/eng/videos?channelId=8ed1df0b90091110VgnVCM1000003a94610aRCRD&sourceId=0bb4a899d5e92210VgnVCM100000176f620a____

Now, can we all please stop posting ignorant things like blanket statements that have no actually credibility, so others will not become offended? Is fact checking too hard before you post? Your honest mistake of not verifying accuracy in your statement can lead to someone calling you intolerant, or visa versa, eventually leading to a similar episode between Wrex and Luna, not saying that was based on ignorance. Here, let me repeat this, in case some readers didn't read my long, ranty post in the Church Dogs thread:

The moral of the story:

Be careful, the debate you want so badly is not going to be fun if there IS NO SOLUTION!!!

When it comes to debates about religion, there IS NO SOLUTION!!! Agree to disagree or STFU!!!

The person you just unknowing insulted is probably just as bi-polar or damaged as you are. The debate will end in tears... An there is a 50-50 chance they will be yours...

Understanding and tolerance are two different things. Do not assume either you or your debate partner know the difference. Those concepts ave VERY SUBJECTIVE!!!

And in case you are wondering, yes I am a little pissed... When some one who actually knows what the feth he is talking about states Mormon doctrine, I am flamed as intolerant... But when some one who posts an ACTUAL offensive blanket statement, Dakka hops on board the flame train...

Grr...

Oh tblock, you're just being intolerant. *snicker snicker*

Wow, is there egg on my face:

Unlike Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant Christianity, Mormonism does not include belief in a Trinity, in which the one God consists of three persons. Instead, Mormons believe that the "Godhead" is made up of three distinct beings who are "one in purpose" but not in being. These beings are:

* God the Heavenly Father;
* Jesus Christ; and
* the Holy Spirit (or Holy Ghost).

I guess that is either ignorance on my part, of the brainwashing when I was eight... When the statement about the trinity was made earlier in the tread, I had flashbacks to my baptism and confirmation, as well as my Aaronic Priesthood ordaining... SORRY DAKKA!!!

My rant above still applies... And I think I just proved my point...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

youngblood wrote:Oh tblock, you're just being intolerant. *snicker snicker*

Hurr durr hurr...
May the flames of these posts cleanse my soul...

Naw, seriously, I just wanted to say that the "I" word can be just as damaging as some of the other offensive words in our vernacular.