- From: "Alex W." <ingilt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 13:39:29 +0200
"Bart Goddard" <goddardbe@xxxxxxxxxxxx> schrieb im
"Alex W." <ingilt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
The point is, that the "something" needs to be
Nothing wrong with explanations, as long as you don't
that there are multiple versions equally as valid as each
Who knows what "valid" means here. How, exactly, do you
judge what is "valid"? There are sects that pluck their
eyeballs out. Is that as valid as Calvinism?
Possibly not if you're a Calvinist or an eyeball-remover.
Rather, it is the demand to have faith in something
There is no "demand". Faith is trust, and you can't
that someone trust in something.
Well, telling me that unless I have faith in XYZ I will
eternity in the hellfires of damnation (without relief)
sounds pretty much like a demand to me.
Then you're not listening. So to answer your previous
question: This is what makes me think you're not a
church-goer. Maybe you go, but if you're just listening
to the choirs, you're not really playing with the others.
No, I'm really rather certain that I got this part of the
Message quite straight from several pulpits: love Jesus
because that's the only way you will be saved come the Day.
For anybody entertaining the concept of an immortal soul
cowering somewhere in the bowels of their being, that can be
a fairly potent sort of demand.
One shouldn't fall into the other extreme either. If
does not inform your thoughts and actions in this life,
loses rather a great deal.
Point being that one can take the "faith rules all" approach
too far. One should not let one's faith become so
all-encompassing that one loses sight of living a decent
life over it. If you let your children die because it's
God's will and modern medicine would interfere with His
will, you go too far. If you refuse to help others because
they are not of the same faith, you go too far. Whatever
your faith will do for you come Judgment Day, if it does not
allow you, help you and guide you in being a good person (or
trying to be), then much of the point of religion is lost
2 + 2 = 4.
Every single time.
The rules of mathematics are reasonably clear, the
repoducible and much of it is amenable to proof.
You cannot say the same about faith which after all,
requires a willing suspension of reason and taking the
answer to Life, the Universe and Everything on trust.
I don't know where you get your ideas about faith, but
they're not part of any orthodox Christianity. No one
ever asked me to suspend reason or to take anything on
trust. Again: Faith is in the heart, not the brain.
Jesus rising from the dead was a miracle. In other words,
it was an act inexplicable by any means other than divine
intervention. And bang, reason goes out the window. You
cannot believe in the resurrection on the basis of reason.
It is irrational by definition.
You do not need to discover calculus. You need to
You can't. You keep assuming P and not P at the same
You can't get anywhere sensible if you insist on doing
I say insulting things about *all* religions.
I say insulting things about *all* mothers, so don't
get bent out of shape when I have a few comments about
The issue is whether they are true. (And they're not.)
The very choice of which Bible to preach from is an act
Wrong again. Doctrine is based on the original languages,
not on the translation adopted for the local congregation.
And all the languages of Scripture are ambiguous, open to
interpretation, since they are all dead. Even Aramaic
which, I gather, is still spoken in some remote part of the
Middle East, is not the same language Jesus would have known
and spoken. We already start to lose meaning from texts
written a generation ago because our understanding of the
context is less than perfect. Go back five hundred years,
and without expert translation we would not be able to read
Middle High German texts -- let alone decypher their correct
meaning, debate over which has granted generations of
academics lifetime careers.
True -- if those two pastors happen to be of the same
But what happens when you pit a Lutheran against a
Still the same.
That brings us right back to "extra ecclesiam nulla
If you're not of the right church, there will be no
salvation for you.
You're Latin is lacking. Recall my definition of "The
is "where the Gospel is preached and the sacraments used
rightly". These things happen to some extent in every
(sensible) congregation. Where they happen, there is the
(true, invisible) Church. You don't know these simple
yet you want to pontificate about the subject as if you
Well, certainly from the Catholic POV, there is no "rightly"
other than in the Roman Catholic sense. "To some extent" is
as good as not at all, as far as Rome ic concerned, to the
extent that they will come down like a ton of bricks on any
Catholic priest who celebrates an ecumenical Eucharist.
y infected with original
I said nothing of the sort. You're still not listening.
- Re: political
- From: Bart Goddard
- Re: political
- Prev by Date: Poker
- Next by Date: Marlboro....cigarettes for $11.99. Delivery to USA & EUROPE.....KTsUXOIhHtI
- Previous by thread: Re: political
- Next by thread: Re: political