• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Hurray for these Christians!

Andalublue

Hello again!
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
27,101
Reaction score
12,358
Location
Granada, España
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
God is sovereign, he works his will. You can think of Orlando or 9/11 as hints. Calling a group a "church" doesn't make it Godly.

So, Orlando and 9/11 was the work of your god. Your vile creed means nothing to me. Calling your 'God' a deity doesn't make him less evil.
 

Grand Mal

Russian warship, go f*** yourself!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
45,967
Reaction score
27,328
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
I've often contributed to threads condemning fundamentalist religious bigotry. Wahhabism, WBC, Haredi and Moral Majority types have all had my condemnation. If you criticise wildly reactionary Christian morals strongly, then I think you also have the obligation to recognise when other Christian denominations do something that demonstrates love, acceptance and moral tolerance.

I was heartened to read this article about one such Christian church doing something positive and progressive. Good for the URC (Presbyterian/Congregationalist) if and when they make this momentous decision, and congratulations to the happy couple, whenever they tie the knot.

Gay marriage vote: The couple hoping to marry in church - BBC News

They're little-known outside Canada, but this...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Church_of_Canada

...is pretty much the face of Protestantism in Canada. Their head is called a 'Moderator' and a few years ago an openly gay guy held the office. They've got to be about the most peaceful, palatable Prods in the world.
 

ChezC3

Relentless Thinking Fury
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
Messages
12,228
Reaction score
4,458
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
And yet you leave it unanswered. I'm aware of the differences between Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant attitudes to scripture, tradition and mystery.

And I'm aware of that position too.


And yet you respect him? A heretic? So, how come you used the word 'heretic' as an insult with which to dismiss the URC?

Did Tertullian do that too? or was he perhaps a heretic because he was the first to interpret scripture in a particular way that contradicted tradition, not contradicted scripture itself, which is, after all, clearly open to interpretation.

I see, so their acceptance of gay marriage, which they DID indeed approve today, is secondary to the fact that they are scriptural Christians, rather than 'traditional' Christians.

Actually I did answer it.

This isn't a "position" this is a fact.

I said I respected him? When? He was a heretic because he taught (concerning remarriage of widows and fleeing persecution) that which was against what the Church taught. Like homosexuals can marry. Which is a contradiction of both scripture and tradition.

Their acceptance of gay marriage is indeed a testament to how far the apple has fallen from the tree. It's merely a symptom, a natural progression of a continued errancy of thought which has accumulated with time.

I think you have this simple notion of heresy. To be in full communion with the Church means that every jot and tittle you believe is as the Church has taught. As the jots and tittles pile up that you've thrown by the way side in accepting your own version of things, your own interpretation that doesn't align with the Church the less you are in communion with Her.

So, for instance, while I subscribe whole-heartedly and believe what is dogma and doctrine concerning the Church's social teaching (with the exception of one aspect of which I am still open to accepting), me being in communion with the Church there, I have ontological arguments that I feel need to be addressed, revisited, explored et al. that do not align with the Church's teaching. Therefore (oh, wonderful! therefore!) I can be considered a heretic in that regard. I'm not wholly in communion with the Church.

As it pertains to these individuals, their dogmas, doctrines, beliefs, etc etc... they are so far removed from communion with the Church that they can be called heretics on any number of issues not the least of which would be gay marriage.

It's not a case of you are either a True Believer or you are a Heretic. In or Out. It's a matter of degrees.
 

Andalublue

Hello again!
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
27,101
Reaction score
12,358
Location
Granada, España
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Actually I did answer it.

This isn't a "position" this is a fact.

I said I respected him? When? He was a heretic because he taught (concerning remarriage of widows and fleeing persecution) that which was against what the Church taught. Like homosexuals can marry. Which is a contradiction of both scripture and tradition.

Their acceptance of gay marriage is indeed a testament to how far the apple has fallen from the tree. It's merely a symptom, a natural progression of a continued errancy of thought which has accumulated with time.

I think you have this simple notion of heresy. To be in full communion with the Church means that every jot and tittle you believe is as the Church has taught. As the jots and tittles pile up that you've thrown by the way side in accepting your own version of things, your own interpretation that doesn't align with the Church the less you are in communion with Her.

So, for instance, while I subscribe whole-heartedly and believe what is dogma and doctrine concerning the Church's social teaching (with the exception of one aspect of which I am still open to accepting), me being in communion with the Church there, I have ontological arguments that I feel need to be addressed, revisited, explored et al. that do not align with the Church's teaching. Therefore (oh, wonderful! therefore!) I can be considered a heretic in that regard. I'm not wholly in communion with the Church.

As it pertains to these individuals, their dogmas, doctrines, beliefs, etc etc... they are so far removed from communion with the Church that they can be called heretics on any number of issues not the least of which would be gay marriage.

It's not a case of you are either a True Believer or you are a Heretic. In or Out. It's a matter of degrees.

I hear you. I'm just not sure that a self-confessed 'heretic', using the word as an insult, is being entirely ingenuous, in spite of talk of 'a matter of degrees'. I also don't think that the condemnation of protestant 'heresy' by a papist still imparts the sting it did in, say the year 1600. You are not disagreeing with the United Reformed Church because of their newly adopted, inclusive marriage policy, but because they are the United REFORMED Party. I guess that for a traditionalist, any sign of change can be used as a weapon in the counter-reformational struggle.

As an aside, it amuses me enormously that some Christian anti-Islamicists rightly condemn the retrogressive teachings of mainstream Islam, but go on to argue that the big difference between Islam and Christianity is the fact that Christianity had a reformation and that what Islam needs today is one of its own. Hilarious, given that followers of unreformed Christianity (Catholic, Oriental and Eastern Orthodox) outnumber the reformed by an order of 2-to-one.
 

Logicman

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 21, 2013
Messages
22,592
Reaction score
2,300
Location
United States
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
I've often contributed to threads condemning fundamentalist religious bigotry. Wahhabism, WBC, Haredi and Moral Majority types have all had my condemnation. If you criticise wildly reactionary Christian morals strongly, then I think you also have the obligation to recognise when other Christian denominations do something that demonstrates love, acceptance and moral tolerance.

I was heartened to read this article about one such Christian church doing something positive and progressive. Good for the URC (Presbyterian/Congregationalist) if and when they make this momentous decision, and congratulations to the happy couple, whenever they tie the knot.

Gay marriage vote: The couple hoping to marry in church - BBC News

This is an abomination.

Gay sex is clearly a sin in the Bible. And thus, gay marriage would be nothing more than institutionalized sin.

The following quote from your article also was an exercise in folly: ""I don't think we're there yet, but I'm optimistic that we will get there. I think there has been a monumental societal shift within the LGBT community and that everybody widely accepts that this is about love," she says.

So, if it's all about love then two adulterers in love must be okay too. Nope, not a chance.

For the record,

"Love does not rejoice in iniquity" - 1 Corinthians 13

And,

"Love does no harm to a neighbor" - Romans 13:10 (Love does no harm to a neighbor, like enticing one's neighbor into a sinful relationship for which there are negative temporal and eternal consequences)

So, nice try but no cigar.
 

Logicman

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 21, 2013
Messages
22,592
Reaction score
2,300
Location
United States
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Tertullian, the father of latin Christianity, the one who is credited with the development of the Trinity as it is known today was branded a heretic for some of his thoughts.

I'd have to disagree. The "Trinity" was clearly evident in scripture long before Tertullian. He might have advanced what was already in scripture, but he didn't 'develop' it. There were others who commented on the concept before Tertullian.

https://carm.org/early-trinitarian-quotes
 

countryboy

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
18,769
Reaction score
7,410
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I've often contributed to threads condemning fundamentalist religious bigotry. Wahhabism, WBC, Haredi and Moral Majority types have all had my condemnation. If you criticise wildly reactionary Christian morals strongly, then I think you also have the obligation to recognise when other Christian denominations do something that demonstrates love, acceptance and moral tolerance.

I was heartened to read this article about one such Christian church doing something positive and progressive. Good for the URC (Presbyterian/Congregationalist) if and when they make this momentous decision, and congratulations to the happy couple, whenever they tie the knot.

Gay marriage vote: The couple hoping to marry in church - BBC News
Lol. So you celebrate Christians, as long as they behave the way you wish them to. How magnanimous of you. :roll:
 

Manc Skipper

Wrinkly member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2008
Messages
38,846
Reaction score
27,953
Location
Southern England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
This is an abomination.

Gay sex is clearly a sin in the Bible. And thus, gay marriage would be nothing more than institutionalized sin.

The following quote from your article also was an exercise in folly: ""I don't think we're there yet, but I'm optimistic that we will get there. I think there has been a monumental societal shift within the LGBT community and that everybody widely accepts that this is about love," she says.

So, if it's all about love then two adulterers in love must be okay too. Nope, not a chance.

For the record,

"Love does not rejoice in iniquity" - 1 Corinthians 13

And,

"Love does no harm to a neighbor" - Romans 13:10 (Love does no harm to a neighbor, like enticing one's neighbor into a sinful relationship for which there are negative temporal and eternal consequences)

So, nice try but no cigar.

A purported follower of a fgure who was so concerned about "an abomination" he never mentioned it? His message of universal love passed YOU by!
 

Andalublue

Hello again!
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
27,101
Reaction score
12,358
Location
Granada, España
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Lol. So you celebrate Christians, as long as they behave the way you wish them to. How magnanimous of you. :roll:

I'm hardly going to celebrate them doing something I deem despicable, now am I? I'm guessing you aren't celebrating this development because they aren't doing what you'd wish them to do. Circular logic.
 

countryboy

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
18,769
Reaction score
7,410
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
He gave credit where it was due. Get in the sack with Chez and Logicman.

No he didn't. He praised Christians for behaving as he wished. Not surprised at the idiotic, childish, vulgar, ad hominem attack though, it's about all you've got.
 

countryboy

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
18,769
Reaction score
7,410
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I'm hardly going to celebrate them doing something I deem despicable, now am I? I'm guessing you aren't celebrating this development because they aren't doing what you'd wish them to do. Circular logic.

Why would I celebrate those who adopt heresy as an official part of their doctrine? It has nothing to do with what I wish them to do, it concerns what the God they claim to worship wishes them to do.


Do you applaud fellow leftists who are pro gun rights?
 

Andalublue

Hello again!
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
27,101
Reaction score
12,358
Location
Granada, España
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Why would I celebrate those who adopt heresy as an official part of their doctrine? It has nothing to do with what I wish them to do, it concerns what the God they claim to worship wishes them to do.
I suspect that their judgement of what constitutes heresy, and interpretation of what they believe their God wishes is different from yours. Who knows, perhaps it's not even the same God that you worship.


Do you applaud fellow leftists who are pro gun rights?
No. I don't have a pony in your gun control debate. None of my business.
 

Manc Skipper

Wrinkly member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2008
Messages
38,846
Reaction score
27,953
Location
Southern England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Believers should recognise that your god is man-made when he hates the same people you do.
 
Last edited:

d0gbreath

Yellow Dog Democrat
Banned
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Messages
16,693
Reaction score
5,629
Location
There's my hat.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Communist
Why would I celebrate those who adopt heresy as an official part of their doctrine? It has nothing to do with what I wish them to do, it concerns what the God they claim to worship wishes them to do.


Do you applaud fellow leftists who are pro gun rights?

Heretic is the Christian word for Infidel.

You know where that leads us to Brother.
 

Logicman

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 21, 2013
Messages
22,592
Reaction score
2,300
Location
United States
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
A purported follower of a fgure who was so concerned about "an abomination" he never mentioned it?

Tsk tsk. I suppose you're talking about Jesus. And it's typical of you that you don't have a clue what you're talking about when it comes to the Bible.

FYI, Jesus is God (many scriptures). As God, Jesus is the one who gave Moses the Leviticus law against gay sexual relations to begin with; and he’s the one who inspires all Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16), including prohibitions against gay sexual relations in Romans 1:26-27 and I Corinthians 6:9-10, etc.

It’s also worth noting that Jesus didn’t mention wife beating or other sins such as pedophilia either, and there are not many folks who would argue he approved of those behaviors. So Jesus was under no obligation to reiterate the moral laws against homosexual sin that already existed, unless there were clarifications to be made.

So, do try to incorporate those things into your theological handbook.

His message of universal love passed YOU by!

The truth has evidently passed YOU by.

So get your story straight. He didn't approve of sinful behaviors, Manc. That's a fact.
 

roguenuke

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 6, 2007
Messages
59,062
Reaction score
23,147
Location
Rolesville, NC
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Changing the fundamental ethics offers a religion is always tempting to attract more payers. Finance is a strong motivator.

This is interesting at a time, when the Christian population is growing faster than the global population. You see, it is continuity of law that is a major atractor of religions. Jettisoning it is risky stuff as beliefs generally loose legitimacy, when they go relativistic.

How do you know that it isn't the changes in policies, rules, edicts, ethics, whatever you want to call it, that isn't attracting more Christians? That could be the very thing that is increasing those numbers, particularly in either developed countries or in countries where the dominate religion is even more hostile.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

countryboy

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
18,769
Reaction score
7,410
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Heretic is the Christian word for Infidel.

You know where that leads us to Brother.

Where does it lead? Orthodox teaching? Obedience to God?

Its one thing to have doctrinal differences of opinion, it's another thing entirely to eschew doctrine altogether.
 

d0gbreath

Yellow Dog Democrat
Banned
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Messages
16,693
Reaction score
5,629
Location
There's my hat.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Communist
Where does it lead? Orthodox teaching? Obedience to God?

Its one thing to have doctrinal differences of opinion, it's another thing entirely to eschew doctrine altogether.

That would lead to executing all who are not rightous in the name of Jesus Christ.

This has been tried before.
 

countryboy

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
18,769
Reaction score
7,410
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
That would lead to executing all who are not rightous in the name of Jesus Christ.

This has been tried before.

Oh good grief, gimme a break. Talk about heresy. :roll:
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,653
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
How do you know that it isn't the changes in policies, rules, edicts, ethics, whatever you want to call it, that isn't attracting more Christians? That could be the very thing that is increasing those numbers, particularly in either developed countries or in countries where the dominate religion is even more hostile.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That is not, what I have read nor is it the general opinion I have heard from people in the Catholic or Lutheran churches. But, if you have links to long term studies, it is a subject that I am interested in.
 

d0gbreath

Yellow Dog Democrat
Banned
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Messages
16,693
Reaction score
5,629
Location
There's my hat.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Communist
Oh good grief, gimme a break. Talk about heresy. :roll:

Blasphemy might get you excommunicated, while heresy is a death sentence.

Shirley, you know this.
 

countryboy

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
18,769
Reaction score
7,410
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Blasphemy might get you excommunicated, while heresy is a death sentence.

Shirley, you know this.

Yeah, modern Christians are executing heretics left and right. :roll:
 
Top Bottom