ARG220 - Let him live?

Is anyone else as sick and tired of Adam and his effort to turn EVERY topic into a debate about heaven and hell. Maybe his going to heaven sooner than later would be just dessert. After all, what a more boring place than his idea of reward for all these wonderful works he's doing?

------------------
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice - Albert Einstein

Yeah, he's a loser. Let it go.

He's kinda funny, though.

[StrTrkr777]

Well you are obviously going to Hell for even thinking such a thing.

Just kidding. Thought I would turn this into a Heaven or Hell thread before Adam.

Maybe he will learn to lighten up. Though some seem to enjoy bashing him and if he were gone, they might not have anything else to do.

Jeffery

[jazzmine]

Jeffery said:

Thought I would turn this into a Heaven or Hell thread before Adam.

She squeals with delight and hands you the "I can turn any debate into a heaven or hell discussion faster than adam can award" (otherwise known as the ictadiahohdftac award).

trisha

------------------
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice - Albert Einstein

[Czarcasm]

I believe I know ARG220's secret-He wants to be a M*A*R*T*Y*R! He envisions himself to be Daniel in the den of lions. "They're all attacking me, so I MUST be on the side of the angels!" He deliberately posts to create attacks, just to show his "bravery".

[jazzmine]

I often find it very disappointing that "bravery" is not, a lot of the times, backed up by intelligence.

trisha

------------------
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice - Albert Einstein

If I must die, then why? I seriously want to know what all of you think of me, and why.

Adam

[ChrisCTP]

Adam asks:
"If I must die, then why?"

Adam, they don't seriously want you to die. They just want you to stop turning every discussion into a sermon. There are other message board sites for theological discussion and debate. Do yourself a favour and face the facts. These people, myself included, don't hold much interest in what God thinks about <insert earthly, tangible topic here>... we care what we think. We ask each other questions because we want to know what the others have to say. If we believed that all the answers could be found in the bible, we'd read that, instead of these message boards. If we wanted to talk about Jesus, Allah, Buddha, Zeus, Ra, or any other deity, there would be a thread created for such a purpose...most likely in GQ or GD. So, Adam, not to put too sharp a point on it, if you're going to post religious messages in a clearly NON-religious thread, expect some backlash.

He also requests:
"I seriously want to know what all of you think of me, and why."

If that hasn't been made clear, then you're wearing blinders.

[ChrisCTP]

DISCLAIMER: (also known as Covering My Ass In A Manner So As Not To Be Ostracized And Censored As Has Become The Custom These Days)

I realize that by saying "we" in reference to members of the SDMD, that I'm not actually speaking for absolutely everyone, and I just wanted to clarify that I used the word "we" generically, rather than definitively.

[Alex Kennedy]

ChrisCTP said:

If we wanted to talk about Jesus, Allah, Buddha, Zeus, Ra, or any other deity, there would be a thread created for such a purpose...most likely in GQ or GD.

Now, now, let's not get nasty and start calling names. You know, I know, and the large majority of Buddhists know, that the Historical Buddha is not a god. Even the cosmic Buddha is not a god, just some dude (or cosmos) which has attained its Buddha nature. Heck, it's made pretty clear that gods (or, at least, angelic beings) can't attain their buddha nature. Plus, Shaka (Or Siddhartha, or however you want to call him) exlicitly said "I'm not a god, don't worship me). I guess there are some people who for some reason worship the historical Buddha as a god, but I always wonder if these people have actually read any teachings. However, I'm not going to make a big fight of it; such is the way of the floating world.

Boy, I like using these UBB code things!

[C K Dexter Haven]

Chris says: << I realize that by saying "we" in reference to members of the SDMD, that I'm not actually speaking for absolutely everyone, and I just wanted to clarify that I used the word "we" generically, rather than definitively. >>

Aha, Chris, so you're using the editorial oui... er, I mean, the editorial wheeeeeeee.

I.....MUST.....WITNESS.....CANNOT.....CONTROL.....URGE.....
Must.....show.....them.....the.....error.....of.....their.....ways

sheesh and pshaw

god, don't you just love that word "pshaw" I have teenagers now and find many uses for it.

trisha

------------------
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice - Albert Einstein


(Note: I've inserted a carriage return in an effort to get this topic to format properly)


[Note: This message has been edited by Lynn Bodoni]

[jazzmine]

Is it just me, or did I fuck up the board with my stupid ellipses? (Apologies to TennHippie for the sexual reference ;))

trisha

------------------
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice - Albert Einstein

[Mr Thin Skin]

I'm new here, but I don't get it. I went to the Great Debates forum and looked for a likely topic that this ARG person would be mucking up. "Biblical Errancy" looked like a good one. ARG only made one remark there. He essentially professed his ignorance of the bible then shut up. I always like watching glassy-eyed fanatics at work, but I'm sorely disappointed with ARG. Judging from what I saw in that topic, there are some very knowledgeable persons here. Does ARG discount their knowledge as book only and not from the heart?

Adam wrote:

If I must die, then why? I seriously want to know what all of you think of me, and why.
Adam

I like you, because you stick up for what you believe in and seem to be a compassionate person. That doesn't mean I agree with you all the time, but I think you're a decent guy.

Aw, I like ARG! As a dedicated heathen and atheist, I find it fascinating to hear about others' religious beliefs. I also didn't realize how horrifying and illogical Judaism was until CM started telling us about it, either. So let the religious people have their say, bless their little cotton socks! We all learn a lot--though it's not usually what they intended for us to learn . . .

[StrTrkr777]

ARG I have nothing against you. But as has been discussed in the past, because we cannot know a person's real character or sincerity on this or any other message board, witnessing does no good. It should occur with those you spend actual physical time with. They will know who you and and your heart and will be more receptive to your message.

Also, don't quit posting on religious threads, just keep in mind that others have different beliefs than you and telling them they are wrong will not win friends. Take what they say to heart, pray on it, compare it to your own beliefs and then post why you believe differently on the matter.

From this we hopefully all learn from each other and hopefully grow stonger in our own beliefs. I know learning more about Judaism from CK, CM, Keeves, etc. has increased my knowledge of the bible and strengthened my beliefs.

Just lighten up a bit.

Jeffery

[jazzmine]

thank you Jeffery, that was very well put.

trisha

------------------
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice - Albert Einstein

[vanillanice]

Arg, You know I love you.If you weren't hitting home with your statements,people wouldn't be so rankled by them.So you are getting through.Otherwise,they would just ignore you.So keep your chin up ;)

[Czarcasm]

Vanillanice, you believe that because ARG has managed through ignorance and artifice to really piss-off a large number of people, he has done a good job of "getting through" to them?
Gee, I'd LOVE to hear your opinion of Hitler!

Vanillanice wrote:

Arg, You know I love you.If you weren't hitting home with your statements,people wouldn't be so rankled by them.So you are getting through.Otherwise,they would just ignore you.So keep your chin up

Heh.

[jazzmine]

vanillanice wrote:

Arg, You know I love you.If you weren't hitting home with your statements, people wouldn't be so rankled by them.So you are getting through. Otherwise, they would just ignore you.So keep your chin up

ummm, yeah... that's it... he's getting through... uh huh

trisha

------------------
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice - Albert Einstein

[Babar714]

You're freakin' annoying, Adam. You annoy me and many others. Sure, you believe strongly in all this crap, but you're just annoying.

I've gotta say that even though I flame him often, I do have respect for Adam. He has repeatedly stated that he has people's best interests at heart and that he wants to help everyone be "saved."

But it's also true that he will never convert me to his religion. Yes, he is wasting his time arguing religion with me. But I do find it interesting and sometimes enlightening to learn about what others believe, so I hope I haven't driven him away from the board with my sarcastic remarks. I do respect him--it's just his anti-LDS remarks I disagree with.

[Monty]

Snarkberry: I must disagree with you on this individual.

He's not only annoying, he's also a narrow-minded, bigot who's quite proud not only of his ignorance but of how he became that ignorant.

I couldn't care less what faith he follows, but what galls me is his out of hand dismissal and attack on ALL other relgioins. Said religions, you might note, of which he has exactly zero factual knowledge.

He has stated so many times that he will not gain knowledge of those faiths.

You may recall that he accuses me of not having studied the Bible solely because I disagree with nearly every thing he says. Another poster (I think it was Lucky) aptly pointed out to Adam that I have, in fact, study the Bible and that Adam obviously can not have studied it as he hasn't read the thing.

So what we're dealing with here is:
-Ignorance
-Pride in Ignorance
-Intolerance of other's thoughts
-Martyr Syndrome.

I think that pretty much points to a young adult or teenager who is obviously home-schooled by incomptent fundamentlaist fanatic parents.

Home-schooling can be a great thing. In this case, it's a disaster

Monty wrote about Adam:

So what we're dealing with here is:
-Ignorance
-Pride in Ignorance
-Intolerance of other's thoughts
-Martyr Syndrome.

Well, I agree that Adam definitely has some serious problems in tolerating others, and he does seem to be a bit narrow-minded when it comes to religion. But if I can change from the idiot I was (and still sometimes am) into the marvelous example of mature manhood that I am today, there's hope for Adam, too. I think exposure to other religions and philosophies over the internet will do him a world of good if he takes advantage of said exposure.

On the other hand, if he only reads Pentacostal Christian web sites and refuses to listen to others' viewpoints, he'll probably remain the person he is today, only older. It's his call, and I hope we can persuade him to open his mind up a little. It's worth a try. :)

[Doobieous]

he does seem to be a bit narrow-minded when it comes to religion.

A bit narrow minded? 'Scuse me, but he's just plain ignorant of other religions and he doesnt even know his own religion all that well either (He thinks Catholics aren't christian LMAO). I generally dont bother with him because the only one who can change is him. Fundamentalists rarely ever change. CHange scares them, thats why they say anything that doesn't mesh with their views is heretical or sinful.

------------------
"Raw to the floor like reservoir dogs"
- A.V. Helden

I'm going to try to post without using Scripture. I'll probably be forced to use it at some point, but I can try. anyway, here we go.

I don't think any of you know what being Christian means. Or if you know, you don't truly understand. You say I'm intolerant of other religions. Well, that's my job. There is nothing higher than God. There is no law above His. There is no other God besides the God of the Bible, the God of Abraham, and Isaac, the living God. Any other belief that says otherwise is of Satan, who is the ruler of this earth.

Catholics. Catholics believe in many things that are not in the Bible. They have added so much ritual, and so much emptiness to the faith that it's not even funny. They also go against the very teachings of Jesus. They believe that salvation is based on works. This is directly opposite to what Jesus says. They pray to Mary, and pray to the saints. In doing so, they exalt those humans to the level of Jesus, and the Father. This is also DIRECTLY opposite to what the Bible says. Christians obey, and adhere to ALL of the words of Jesus, and the Father. (Or at least that's their goal in life)

I do not doubt that Catholics, and Mormons, and Jews....etc...love God. Loving God is great. And you may even love Jesus, and that's wonderful. You may even believe what I do, and that's awesome. But you know what? That's not going to get you into heaven. You must walk the walk, and not only talk the talk. Believing in Jesus is the key to heaven, but unless it's on your death bed, then you have to live the life of a Christian. Calling on His name will save you, but then you have to live a holy life. Like it says in Revelation, you must OVERCOME.

I said very early on that there are saved Jews, and Catholics...etc. I'm not backing down from that statement. If you love the Catholic church, and you like the smell of inscence (sp?), and you like to sing those hymns, then that's cool. You can go to mass, but you must not adopt the ideas of that church. You must follow Jesus, and not some Pope. You must confess you sins to JESUS, and NOT some preist in confession. Who gave that priest the power to forgive you? Nobody. He has no power to forgive you. Only your Father in heaven can forgive your sins. Skip confession. Get on your face before the real Father, and tell Him your story.

I am a follower of Jesus. I've read my Bible, and know what it says. Christians are supposed to love, and supposed to be kind. But like the Father, they are supposed to hate sin, and be opposed to all who oppose God. Jesus said, "If you're not for me, then you're against me."

My goodness, I shudder to think of what the world would be like if nobody opposed sin. Satan already rules this planet with an iron grip. I dare say that it's only because of Christians that this world keeps turning 'round. I believe that like Ninevah, God is saving this planet because there are a few left who love Him. Perhaps that's a bit extreme, but it could be true.

Before any of you talk about me, why don't you learn what being a Christian really is. Perhaps if SoxFan were reading this, he could give his input on this post. He may not like my style, which would be understandable. But I bet that he'd agree with what I say.

I think I'm done ranting. I've already lost any chance that one of you might get saved. I may as well be free to speak my mind. I don't know why I'm surprised that you all oppose me. It's what I should expect. And perhaps I should be happy about it, like Paul would be. Who knows.

Adam

Adam wrote:

Catholics. Catholics believe in many things that are not in the Bible. They have added so much ritual, and so much emptiness to the faith that it's not even funny. They also go against the very teachings of Jesus. They believe that salvation is based on works. This is directly opposite to what Jesus says.

And then:

You may even believe what I do, and that's awesome. But you know what? That's not going to get you into heaven. You must walk the walk, and not only talk the talk. Believing in Jesus is the key to heaven, but unless it's on your death bed, then you have to live the life of a Christian. Calling on His name will save you, but then you have to live a holy life. Like it says in Revelation, you must OVERCOME.

(Bolding mine). So, in other words, you aren't saved by works, but you must live the life of a Christian (which implies doing good works) to get saved. Am I missing something here?

Adam, I don't believe most Catholic doctrine either, but that doesn't mean I attack them constantly and condemn them all to hell. The word is toleration. You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar, too, which you might consider before you give another "hellfire" sermon.

[Falcon]

Adam -

Next time you want to talk about Catholics, read the Catecism first. Please tell me what I believe that's not in the Bible. (And even though I've been nasty before, I am genuinely interested. I'd love to know what part of my faith you think doesn't come from the Bible.) We believe salvation is based on faith AND works. "Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says." James 1:22

Second, only a small group of Catholics "worship" Mary. Most Catholics believe Mary and the saints intercede on our behalf to God. By praying to them, we are asking them to take our prayers to God, and to Jesus. We are not placng them on the same level. (Well, most Catholics, anyway.)

Third, not all Catholics confess to a priest. I am a Catholic, and I have never been to confession. You are confessing your sins to Jesus and to God through the priest.

All in all, Adam, I'm giving you the usual refrain you've heard from Snark and Monty. Read up on the religion before you slam it, dear.

[jazzmine]

Adam,

I was wondering if God is going to send you to hell if there is even one person on this board that will now never be saved because of the way you present religion?

Why do you feel that your arrogance and self-righteousness will not stink in the Lord's nostrils?

Why do you not feel that God wants you to be humble and to "shine" his light through you.

You ask why we don't learn about what being a Christian is before we talk to you about it? You want us to learn the Bible before we discuss it with you.

I have learned about being a Christian. A Pentecostal Christian in fact. I can go head to head with you on the Bible if you like. Seems like a ridiculous, immature confrontation to me, but then...we are talking about Adam, aren't we?

You have ignored every question I've asked you. I have watched you steer completely clear of anyone that seems to have knowledge of the Bible.

You don't want to discuss the Bible. You aren't interested in anyone here being a Christian. You are only interested in being right. In having the last word in.

I know your Bible, I know your religion. I know the teachings. Far be it from me to judge, but I'd say you have some repenting to do to get right with YOUR God.

People find their own way to their own salvation, if they believe they need it. They do not EVER follow someone such as you.

trisha

------------------
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice - Albert Einstein

[Monty]

Adam: I am now calling you a liar. You've posted on this board before that you have not read the whole Bible and now you're stating above in your last posting that you've read your Bible. Which is it?

Or does it matter to you that bearing false witness is a sin?

[Bluepony]

Good grief, normally I just read through these threads but years of repressed Jesuit education just came exploding out of me after reading Adam's Sermon From the Mount.

Adam, I'm not even going to debate with you over whether Catholics are Christian. You have already demonstrated, through your many "theological" efforts, your complete and almost total ignorance of most facets of Christianity. I am in more respect of the viewpoints of an Imam in Mecca or a Shinto priest digressing on the nature of kami than I am with your uncertain grasp of the concepts of Christianity, much less your ignorance of the basic precepts of Roman Catholicism.

As to your Biblical knowledge, I suggest you pick one up (at your stage it doesn't even matter what version or edition) and begin to know your faith. Try to understand the interplay and blending of Hebrew, Aramaic, and classical Greek translated to Latin, then to English. It's more than just grandiose pronouncements of judgement day and eternal damnation. Scholars of all denominations spend countless years reading these books and THEY do not even come out with half the things that you profess. There is an interesting digression on "free will" in John Stienbeck's, East of Eden involving Chinese Confucian scholars dicussing the Fourth Chapter of Genesis, IMHO one of the most profound statements about God and his relation to man. If, by chance, you can even find some added enlightenment, pick up the Torah and read some of it, go to a Hannukah celebration, listen to the story of the Menorah and understand the meaning of the Festival of Lights. Then you may think twice before you have the audacity to attempt to witness to the Children of the Old Covenant. Watch a Muslim in the beauty of their devotion to prayer. Read a few Suras from the Qur'an. Purify a Shinto shrine, read A Book Of Five Rings by the sword-saint Musashi. You might find some clues in this work by a medieval Japanese samurai that echo the scholastic methods espoused by St. Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica . Knowledge is not an evil thing. "There is no darkness but ignorance." (Shakespeare's Twelfth Night . (Thanks, Zette, for the quote) Get the picture Adam? You're not the only one in this world trying to make sense out of it all. Maybe you might then see that to be Christian is to be understanding of what makes us human. In your Father's house, there are many rooms.

Note: The opinions on this soapbox are not necessarily the opinions of the management, this broadcasting station, my beer buddies, or my dog. Offer void where prohibited by law. Some contents may have settled while handling. Objects in the mirror are closer than they appear to be, write your mother, brush your teeth.....

------------------
"...send lawyers, guns, and money..."

Warren Zevon

[AuraSeer]

I don't really want to harm anyone, or have them harmed on my wishes. But if it were guaranteed not to cause any lasting damage, I might pay money to see Adam smacked in the face with a lead pipe.

Because I do not follow the rules of behavior for his religion, in his eyes I am an evil person who should be eternally damned to Hell. This sort of statement will put a damper on any relationship, so I really don't feel any bond of trust or friendship forming here.

Since this is the Pit, I'll give my honest opinion. Adam is a small-minded fool, not for his intolerance but for his intentional ignorance. If he would learn about another religion before condemning it, he could at least make some pretense at a logical argument. But he refuses to learn anything, claiming that he knows the One True Way, and that any contradictory knowledge is a temptation from the devil.

(In response to this, Adam will deny having claimed to know the Only Truth. But though he may not use those exact words, that is exactly what all his posts have meant.)

If it were up to me, I'd tell him to pack up his God and his Bible, and go bother people on some other part of the Web. But it's not up to me, so I'll continue ignoring his attempts to convert people, and mostly suppressing the urge to flame him for being a closed-minded intolerant jerk.

[tomndebb]

Adam, you have done this before and I have corrected you before and you persist in your error without any attempt to understand the truth. Therefore Monty is accurate. For some reason you believe that there are only nine commandments or that "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor" does not apply to you.

Catholics do not believe that they are saved by works. The last time I pointed this out to you, you claimed that you couldn't debate everything that you posted or some such drivel. If you cannot debate every point that you post, you at least have the moral responsibility to not continue to post lies when they have been pointed out to you.

The Catholic Church does not teach that we are saved by works. (It certainly has never taught that any one can get to heaven on their own merits or efforts.) What the RCC does teach is that, while Paul's statements regarding justification by faith are true, the entire concept of salvation is more complex than simply reciting "I accept Jesus as my personal Savior" one day and then going off to lead as sinful a life as you want because you have been "saved."

You may choose to take one aspect of Paul's teachings out of context and call that the whole of Christianity, but the RCC also believes in following the words of Jesus, Himself: ". . . Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink,I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was in prison and you came to me." Throughout Matthew, Jesus exalts those of righteous action and condemns those who fail to act justly. The RCC teaching has never been that one can earn heaven through works, but that if you are not performing the deeds, your words are hollow and you have never actually accepted the salvation Jesus offers.

I would defy you to quote any doctrine of the RCC that claims anyone can earn their way into heaven with works, but I already know, through your posts, that you are too lazy and malevolent to even try. Most likely you will claim that you don't have the wherewithal to research this point (another fine example of home schooling) or else you will quote some other Catholic basher without looking to see whether or not they are lying.

The rest of your libel is pretty much along the same lines. You spout off nonsense handed to you by others, demonstrating your ignorance and their (and your) malice.

Just what is your church? The "Whole Bible Except-That-Commandment-We-Don't-Like Brotherhood"?


------------------
Tom~

[furt]

adam...since you asked for opinions, I'm gonna give one.

I agree with 98% of your theology. I'm an evangelical christian, bible college graduate (theology major), former full-time youth minister, the whole 9 yards.

And quite honestly, you embarrass the heck out of me.

If you are willing to take some advice from someone who was once much like you and is now a older and rounder, there's two things you're doing wrong.

First, you're in the wrong place. Not the straightdope in particular, but the net in general. This is not the best medium for witnessing. Conveying emotion is difficult, there's the time delay, and not many people are going to make themselves vulnerable on a public forum. It would take weeks and weeks on the net to build the kind of rapport that a good listener can build in in half an hour.
You would do far, far better to spend your time in personal contact with real people. Get involved in prison ministry, nursing homes, the homeless and poor, aids patients, anything. Heck, just go to your pastor and ask how he could use you for the 5-10 hours a week you spend on this board. Not only would your time be more efficiently spent, but you yourself would grow more. I learned more about the spirit of Christ washing toilets in an Aids hospice than I have from any of the arguments I've had with unbelievers.

Secondly, there's too much of YOU. If people get upset because of the gospel message, or get upset because Jesus claimed to be the only way to heaven, those things are fine. Jesus said his message would be offensive, and it is. But a lot of the people flaming around here aren't talking/arguing about waht Jesus said, they're mad about what YOU say. YOU, and not Christ, are the focus. If you're very honest with yourself you'll find that there's more than a little bit of pride at work here. Frankly, you are standing in the way of Christ.

Yes, it is your job to be a witness. But it is not your job to be a witness in such a way that you annoy people, and thus turn them off to the gospel permanently. Look in the Bible and you'll find a a directive about what to do when nobody wants to listen to your message; you wipe the dust off your sandals, and keep on walking.

[Monty]

Furt: I'd venture to say there's not a soul here who's upset at the Gospel message; especially since ol' Adam has yet to preach it.

What a few of us have stated, and I in particular do feel, is that ol' Adam lies, bashes, and trashes. How the heck does that fit in with the Gospel? Perhaps that's the 2% you don't agree with.

[furt]

Monty: There have been several posts that were anti-christian or anti-religion. Not as many as were anti-ARG220, obviously. My point is that Adam's personality and conduct are getting in the way of the message he is trying to convey. I agree with many of his beliefs; but not the place or way in which he is expressing them.

At the risk of losing my credibility with Adam, I feel it necessary to say that Catholicism is one area in which we disagree strongly.

[GLWasteful]

Adam:You say I'm intolerant of other religions. Well, that's my job.
Cite?


Catholics believe in many things that are not in the Bible. They have added so much
ritual, and so much emptiness to the faith that it's not even funny. They also go against the very teachings of Jesus. They believe that salvation is based on works. This is directly opposite to what Jesus says. They pray to Mary, and pray to the saints. In doing so, they exalt those humans to the level of Jesus, and the Father. This is also DIRECTLY opposite to what the Bible says.
Adam, I asked my wife to take a look at the above quoted passage. She, you see, is a Catholic, and a Catholic that hasn't been involved in any of your nonsense.

She laughed. She also seemed very concerned that there were people out there who felt what you do, as strongly as you seem to. Keep in mind that she hasn't seen any of your tripe to date, and therefore has no preconceived idea as to what you are. Not only are you off in what you say, you also spit it out just like hundreds of bigots before you. If nothing else, get a new schtick.


I said very early on that there are saved Jews, and Catholics...etc.
No, what you did was say that a christian came to your church. You called him a messianic Jew, but he was a christian. More to the point, he was your kind of christian.


I am a follower of Jesus.
And if the above is true, then I want nothing to do with you and your ilk. Because if you are representative of other followers of Jesus, then they are a close minded, mean spirited lot.


I've read my Bible, and know what it says.
You have done no such thing. Nor do you know any such thing.


Christians are supposed to love, and supposed to be kind.
Then what happened to you?


But like the Father, they are supposed to hate sin, and be opposed to all who oppose God. Jesus said, "If you're not for me, then you're against me."
Oh.


I dare say that it's only because of Christians that this world keeps turning 'round.
Y'know, I keep feeding you that old, "Pride goeth before a fall" line. And you keep ignoring it.


Before any of you talk about me, why don't you learn what being a Christian really is.
As has been explained to you several times, some of the folk here know full well what it means to be a Christian. Being someone like you, though... Bah! Who wants that?


I think I'm done ranting.
Anyone else out there want in on the pool that says this is more nonsense?


I've already lost any chance that one of you might get saved. I may as well be free to speak my mind. I don't know why I'm surprised that you all oppose me. It's what I
should expect. And perhaps I should be happy about it, like Paul would be. Who knows.
"Poor, poor me. I try to make a difference, but it never seems to take."

A word of advice, Adam: When you try to set yourself up as a martyr, like you did above, then even those who might be interested in what you are saying are going to be turned off. Because there's nothing that makes people less comfortable than to watch someone try to hammer himself to a cross.

Waste
Flick Lives!

[Falcon]

Waste sez, in response to ARG:

I think I'm done ranting.
Anyone else out there want in on the pool that says this is more nonsense?

Put me down for $10, Waste. I'm thinking the next round will be Catholic bashing, instead of Mormon bashing. Should be fun - I'd betting ARG will have nothing to say that I haven't already heard before. I'm Catholic, btw. Apparently this means I'm going straight to hell. See y'all there! :)

[GLWasteful]

I'll save you a seat, Falcon.

Waste
Flick Lives!

[CptHowdy65]

Some of you made good points about the fact that Adam is not turning anyone off of religion, he is turning people off of him, and therefore he could say night is dark and no one would listen or agree ..Adam, the little boy who cried wolf...

I also personally have a problem with people who quote the Bible either out of context OR, they repeat something someone told them....or worse yet, they quote incorrectly to supposedly bolster their lame argumen....

No Adam, you cannot witness if you lie, cheat, and generally piss people off

Also, AuraSeer, a lead pipe would only lead to Olympic medals, home movies, and jail time for a fat "security" person....

Adam, I treat you like a telemarketer - I give you the benefit of having a job, just don't call me during meal times - I ain't buying

------------------
The worst thing that can possibly happen is not be used for something by someone - Kurt Vonnegut

I'm going to write out a long response in the GD Forum. I don't want to get a little note from Lynn saying that I broke the rules and was witnessing in her Pit. Look for my long winded post in "Life in Heaven Part 3, page three.

Adam

[Babar714]

Wow. That is annoying.

[ChrisCTP]

I don't even know why I'm bothering, but here goes.

Adam, this is for you. This is coming to you from an agnostic, you know, one who, for whatever reason, has chosen to refrain from embracing religion. You, sir, are an arrogant, sniping hypocrite. It's already been pointed out that you've alternately claimed to have/not to have read your bible. You've stated that Christians are filled with love and compassion for all mankind, yet you relentlessly display unfounded disgust for people who are not Christian, in fact, even for those who practice other Christian denominations than the one that you practice. And then this little blurb... "I dare say that it's only because of Christians that this world keeps turning 'round." Well, you know what Adam? I think you're full of shit.

I allow people of all different beliefs to describe to me what they've learned, what they believe, how they feel and why they feel that way about the religions they practice. Keep in mind, I have not been able to make a choice about religion that has felt right to me, other than not to make a choice. I do not chastise, berate, or belittle people because of their beliefs or convictions, nor do I hold one group higher than another because I have an easier time believing what they say versus what another group says. I admire and respect all forms of spirituality, and I can only hope to attain the strength, courage, and conviction that I believe it takes to "believe".

So where do you get off, telling us all that God is the way and the light? Because you read it in a book? You read it in your Bible and that makes you the authority. Well, when someone comes along with points to the contrary, because of what they read in their book, then it's logical that they might be right, too.

How dare you call yourself a Christian. Despite my incapacity to choose a religion, I have attended church, both as a child and recently again, in support of my friend's father, a Methodist pastor. The messages I get from going to church are not that I should be attempting to destroy or ridicule another person's belief system, but that I should be compassionate, understanding and love everyone I meet. That's my rule of thumb anyway. I'm having a really hard time of it with you. You have proven yourself to be the poorest excuse for a "Christian" that I've ever had the opportunity to come across.

I congratulate you on your strength to embrace spirituality, and I applaud your conviction. The fact still remains that you have done little more then make demands of other board members to come over to your side, to abandon their feelings on the matter and just trust in what you know to be "true".

When you were asked to challenge your own beliefs, you questioned how you were supposed to do that. How about attending all the different places of worship in your area or making appointments with the pastors/ministers/preachers of some of those places to have a theological discussion? Ask them why they believe what they do, find out exactly how their particular brand of faith differs from yours and how its similar. How about reading the books that Bluepony suggested? How about pulling that stick out of your ass and at least making an attempt to be openminded?

You're a human being. I think I remember you saying that you were born-again, or something to that effect. That says to me that you weren't always a Christian, or at least that you didn't spend much time spewing random bible passages at people. You must have had other hobbies, other interests, at one point. So, in keeping with the original post, why don't you save your bible for the people who actually WANT to hear about it, and spend your time here discussing your other interests, asking and trying to find solutions to questions that are of a non-religious nature. You've made your point clear, obviously nobody's going to change your mind on the topic of religion. Now it's time for you to realize that you aren't changing anyone else's mind, either.

------------------
Veni, Vidi, Visa ... I came, I saw, I bought.

Babar: I had planned on posting a very long message, that included much witnessing, over in GD. That is why I didn't post the message here, because nobody, especially me, is supposed to witness in the Pit.

ChrisCTP: Have you read my post in Great Debates yet? If not, I think you should.
There is only one God. There is only one way. Even if I wasn't Christian, then this would still be true. Just think about it for a second. Only one religion can be right. And of course, every one of them thinks they are correct. Fortunatly, the Bible is the key, and has all the answers, ans shows the only way to eternal life, and a holy life here on earth.

I'm not going to debate anymore. My eyes have been opened since reading Furt's post, and going to God with it.

It's all about Jesus. It's not about who's right, and who's wrong. It's not about changing minds, it's more about changing hearts. You said that my mind will never be changed regarding religion Chris. And I thank my God for that. I thank Him that I've built my faith on the Rock of Christ Jesus.

For those of you who don't know, including ChrisCTP, I'm 21 years old. I've been saved (born again) since I was 7 years old. Obviously, I didn't know much about anything before coming to Christ. I've been a Christian my whole life. And I'll BE a Christian, all the rest of my days.

Adam

[SkeptiJess]

To Adam, from Chris: "I think I remember you saying that you were born-again, or something to that effect. That says to me that you weren't always a Christian, or at least that you didn't spend much time spewing random bible passages at people. You must have had other hobbies, other interests, at one point."

Not really, Chris. Adam was born to Pentecostal parents and raised in that church. He "became saved" at age 7. I doubt that he's ever had an original thought and I haven't seen any evidence of hobbys or interests other than his extreme Xtianity, either. He doesn't even like to read, for Pete's sake. He was also home schooled, which goes a long way towards explaining why he is the way he is. In fact, I consider him a perfect poster child against home schooling. BTW, Chris, while I agree with pretty much everything you said, I'm afraid it was wasted effort on your part. As I said once before (in the words of my father): The boy has a head like a bent shit-can lid.

------------------
Jess
Full of 'satiable curtiosity

[SkeptiJess]

Thanks, Jeffery -- I did read Adam's apology after I posted the above (I read the board top to bottom). Adam stated a while back that he was homeschooled in grades 9 - 12.

[Monty]

Well, I'd say I stated more that I was wary of it and hoped it was sincere. I see from Adam's last posting above, it wasn't.

[StrTrkr777]

Thanks Jess, I guess I missed the thread where he said he was home schooled.

Jeffery

[spiffykitty]

Okay, here it is. I am adams mother. I tried to bring him up right, but kids DO have a mind of their own.I apologize for getting him a computer. I didn't know it would lead to this! He used to play with toy soldiers, and the ones who lost he sent to the basement and were never found. Maybe this explains alot. Anyway, I apologize for him. So Sorry...Adam's mum.

[ChrisCTP]

Wow.
Can you say "screeching halt"???



------------------
Veni, Vidi, Visa ... I came, I saw, I bought.

[StrTrkr777]

Adam, not to try to cause any problems, but Jess stated that you were home schooled. Now I know that I have read some posters speculating that you were home schooled, but I do not believe I have read from you that you were. Did I miss something? Were you home schooled? Just curious.

Jeffery

p.s. If you have not read his post in the GD thread, he appologizes for his past posts and has said he will not post in an intolerant manner again. Several of the ones that he has argued with (Snarkberry, Monty, etc.) have accepted his appology.

[matt_mcl]

And of course, every one of them thinks they are correct.

Wrongo, buddy... I think my religion is correct, but not to the exclusion of other religions... I'm a Wiccan, and I think that everyone else who believes in whatever they believe in - Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Islam, Shinto, Buddhism, Asatru, scientific humanism, etc - has as good a chance of having the universe make sense to them as I do. I realize this is a new concept for you, but there are some people out here who do not think that their way is the Only Right Just and True Way (organ chord).

To Matt, Auraseer, and any other self proclaimed warlocks and witches out there:

Do you all believe in the powers of Satan as I do? And do you believe in hell? What about demon possession, and demons in general? I'm not looking for a fight, or argument here. I just want to know what some of you think, instead of going to that website Auraseer gave me. (I went to it, and took a quick glance around, and left)

Thanks in advance,

Adam

[Dernhelm]

After the mention of paganism(?) and Wicca, I got curious. I've been looking at various websites and, quite frankly, I'm lost. So, if you don't mind, I'd like to pick your brains for a bit of info :)
1)What are the roots of your religion? Celtic Druids, Ancient Greek beliefs, other, none. Also, can you recommend any good Celtic mythology books?
2)What are the basic tenets? From what I gather, worship of nature and the mother goddess are major factors. Then again, I could be mistaken.
3)Why? Personal, I know, so don't answer if you don't want to.

That's about it for now. I'm more of a scientific-minded person myself, so religion as a whole seems somewhat dubious to me. Thanks for the help.

P.S. Where was AuraSeer's website posted again?

------------------
"I'm not confused, I'm just well mixed"
--Robert Frost

[AuraSeer]

When Adam (ARG220) asked what Wicca is, I posted this link as a place to find information:
http://www.witchvox.com

He also asked some questions:
To Matt, Auraseer, and any other self proclaimed warlocks and witches out there:
First off, the term "warlock" is considered offensive. I'm told that it was originally derived from an old word for "traitor" (though linguistics is one area I know nothing about). I'm not a warlock, I'm a witch with a Y chromosome.

Do you all believe in the powers of Satan as I do?
In a word, no. The pagan worldview does not include any figure with a role like that of the Christian devil. I believe that people who do wrong do so of their own choice; good or evil come from within, not from any outside source.
An aside here: many pagans depict their male god as a goat-footed man with horns. This figure is not representative of evil or sin. Those connotations were attached to the image by the Christian Church, many years ago, as a way of repudiating the polytheistic religions with which it was competing.
And do you believe in hell?
No. I believe that a person's soul makes multiple trips through this world. The notion that you only get one chance here, and then are either damned or exalted for the remainder of eternity, does not make much sense to me.

What about demon possession, and demons in general?
Not demons per se, but I believe that spirits exist. For a simple distinction, some are "nice" and some are "nasty" and some are in between. Even the worst of them aren't as purely evil as Christian demons, but they're still not often invited to dinner.

I'm not looking for a fight, or argument here. I just want to know what some of you think, instead of going to that website Auraseer gave me. (I went to it, and took a quick glance around, and left)
Well, Adam, you could find far more information on the web than I could ever type here. But I must say I'm glad to see you asking for information, instead of making uninformed pronouncments.

[Czarcasm]

Uh guys? This is precisely how ARG220 started in the first place! He pretended to be interested in what we believed, ignored everything we told him, and proceded to damn us to hell if we didn't believe in HIS version of christianity.
Here we go again.

[AuraSeer]

Yet more from me.
If people really want to ask questions about paganism and Wicca, how about we start a new thread? Should that go into GQ or GD?
If anybody has questions they don't feel comfortable asking in public, feel free to send me email.

[SoxFan59]

A new thread on information regarding paganism or Wicca should be in the GD forum.

It might be construed as "witnessing."

------------------
SoxFan59
"Its fiction, but all the facts are true!"

[jazzmine]

I would love a thread on paganism and/or Wicca. Seer, did you start one yet?

trisha

------------------
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice - Albert Einstein

The other day a man walked into a Jewish community center in California and opened fire into a crowd of teachers and children.

He disagreed with their religious views.

He could not accept that they had a right to seek God in their own way. An infinite God, with infinite aspects can be examined and approached in many ways, all valid.

ARG, how close are you to that man with the rifle?

ARG, are you kin, spiritual kin, to that man with the rifle?

Don't answer me.

Don't ask yourself.

Ask that God you always claim you talk to.

Ok, this question is pure bait, but I'll bite anyway.
You ask:The other day a man walked into a Jewish community center in California and opened fire into a crowd of teachers and children....how close are you to that man with the rifle?

Aparently, you don't know me very well, and haven't read my posts. (Not ALL my recent posts)

I am a very peacable (is that a word?) fellow, and I'm very much against fighting for any reason. I'd rather fight my battles with words, than by physical means. Plus, I don't even know much about that moron in L.A. except that he was a member of a White Supremist group. So, no, he and I are nothing alike. In fact, had I a weapon with me, I think that I might shoot the man with the rifle, if I felt it was absolutely necessary.

For the record, not everyone who is Christian is a snake grabber, and not everyone who says they "hear from God" really does hear the voice of the Father.

Adam

[AuraSeer]

I've just created one:
http://www.straightdope.com/ubb/Forum7/HTML/000227.html

In case the link doesn't work, the thread is over in GD, entitled Wicca and Paganism.

------------------
I'm not a warlock.
I'm a witch with a Y chromosome.

Thanks Auraseer for your answers. And I apologize for calling you a "warlock." I just thought that term meant male witch. I didn't know it was offensive.

Oh, and Slythe, you don't have to worry 'bout me. All I was interested in is what they (Wiccans) believe. And actually, from Auraseer's response, I can see that I was way off about what they believe.

If somebody wants to start a new thread in GD, then that sounds like a good idea.

Adam

[GOD]

Adam, my boy, I appreciate your enthusiasm. But you need to remember that true Faith is based on Love, not Fear.

[Monty]

From ARG220:

For the record, not everyone who is Christian is a snake grabber, and not everyone who says they "hear from God" really does hear the voice of the Father.

Excellent! He's finally learning something! And perhaps he'll even examine his own claim to have heard from God.

As to his remark about a particular question above being pure bait:

Wrong! That question was posed politely and with an express end obvious to most who can think critically.

However, those who've been homeschooled by incompetents...

[Monty]

Daniel: you must have missed the posting from Adam in which he told us all that he gets his ideas of God from his 12 year old brother; evidently that's his "family clergyman."

[pricciar]

This is wrong, SO WRONG. I have disagreed with Adam often, he sometimes needs to have more information about a topic before he starts shooting his darn mouth off. But, never, not once, has he come close to condoning violence. He has even made steps (small steps, but steps nevertheless) to overcome his outright ignorance of other religions. He has has made it clear that he doesn't believe other religions are correct, but what is wrong with that? He asks questions of Auraseer, and he seemed genuinely interested. He is improving.
There are millions of religous people in the world who don't commit violence, yes some of them are even fundamentalist.. Hey, you are a hardline Muslim, you must be carrying a Bomb, Hey you are an Irish Catholic, is that an uzi behind your back? ... and so on, to compare Adam to that madman in LA, is ridiculous and unfair, I believe.

pat

[Contestant #3]

Pat,

You seem to be one of the few fair and honest persons out here.

Keep being you man!

------------------
Contestant #3

ARG, I have read your posts. And I'll give you a little shock---your line about how"peaceable" you are is pure C*R*A*P!

I live in the South. I've seen the remains of bookstores burned by people like you. I've seen classmates at college who were beaten up by crap artists like you. You 'love everybody'---until it becomes obvious that they will not bend to your will.
Yours---not God's.

Then the bloodshed starts.
I've read too much history not to recognise the potential that your religious bigotry represents. People like you just use a church as an excuse to hate . Your own words about other faiths betray the truth about yourself.
You believe that you serve God, but in truth.... your views confound the doctrine of "love thy neighbor as thyself"--said to be the greatest commandment----truly, sir; half-men like you are Hell's best servants.
I say a half-man , because to be a WHOLE man, you need love and compassion for all of humanity. I hope someday you see the error in your flawed system of belief.

Have you discussed your differences with others on the web with your family clergyman?
He might give you a good talking to.

[StrTrkr777]

I would have to agree with Pat. I think that ARG is a bit overzelous (sp?), but he has never even threatened anyone that I have seen in his disagreements.

I too think that ARG is learning to be more understanding of other religions.

Please keep it up ARG.

Jeffery

Daniel: It's a shame that you have to witness the hate displayed in the "name of God" in the south. It's also a shame that you've steryotyped me, based on the actions of a few crazies. The truth is that you know nothing about me. How can you possibly predict what I'd do in a situation, based on my posts.

I am a person who hates violence. And I'm ashamed to be associated with anyone who claims to be working on "God's behalf" when they burn down a Baptist church, or bomb an abortion clinic. I also hate it when "Christians" say hateful things about others, claiming that God hates them. (like gays for example) Those are the kind of people that cloud your image of what a Christian is.

Monty: you said:you must have missed the posting from Adam in which he told us all that he gets his ideas of God from his 12 year old brother; evidently that's his "family clergyman."
You know what Monty? I have to be honest, when I say that you make me....let's just say, very angry. How can you possibly call yourself my brother in the Lord, and then twist my words AGAIN to make me look bad?

I said on 7-09-99:I would listen to the advice of my 12 year old brother, over the advice of Cecil, when it comes to the things of God.

So why Monty, do you twist that into:you must have missed the posting from Adam in which he told us all that he gets his ideas of God from his 12 year old brother; evidently that's his "family clergyman."

Just do me a favor, and stop twisting my words around, ok?

Adam

[tomndebb]

Gee, Adam, I didn't think a little twisting would bother you too much, given that you have consistently made false claims about what other people believe and then refused to actually find out what they believe.

It bothers you? Well, it bothers the rest of us, too. This is the Straight Dope®, meaning Accurate Information, and instead of disagreeing with the teachings of Catholicism, Judaism, Mormonism, Islam, and other beliefs, you have repeatedly made false claims about those beliefs. You want to be treated nicely and fairly? Then start obeying all ten commandments and stop leaving out the one prohibiting false witness. Until you can grasp that (and act on it), the rest of us are going to just laugh at your whining about Monty's posts.

------------------
Tom~

Tom: Yea, I know it was whining. I kind of wish I could take that post to Monty back now. But you can't compare him to me. This isn't the first time he has twisted my words. It's obvious he has something against me personally. (Am I right Monty?)

Anyway, what do you mean I bore (beared?) false witness? Did I ever lie about another religion? To the best of my knowledge, I didn't. You may not agree with what I say, and it may anger you that I'm right, but it doesn't make me a liar. Besides, doesn't lying require you to actually know the truth in the first place? So, if I lied about another religion, maybe I didn't know it??? Maybe I just didn't know what I was talking about in the first place? (which is doubtful anyway)

But come now Tom, you can't possibly compare me to our scheming friend Monty.

Adam

[Xgemina]

Adam said
Besides, doesn't lying require you to actually know the truth in the first place? So, if I lied about another religion, maybe I didn't know it???

You watched Clinton's deposition didn't you?

Does your business card now read: "Saving souls and twisting semantics my specialty."

If you don't know something or you're not sure then you should state "I don't know," or "I've been told" or "IIRC" or "I've been lead to believe" or "I'm not sure" or "I've heard (here you should put who you heard it from) that."

Otherwise ppl will assume that you've actually done some research on your own or that you do know what you are talking about.

[Big Iron]

[[Anyway, what do you mean I bore (beared?) false witness? Did I ever lie about another religion?]] Arg


Yes, repeatedly.


[[ To the best of my knowledge, I didn't.]]


You considering law school?


[[ Maybe I just didn't know what I was talking about in the first place? (which is doubtful anyway)]]


Now that's funny!


[[But come now Tom, you can't possibly compare me to our scheming friend Monty. ]]


Of course not -- Monty is a valuable, intelligent poster and you're neither.

[Czarcasm]

I'm not lying, I'm ignorant!
"..scheming friend Monty.."

This is right-wing christian love at it's finest, folks. Maybe it's time to stop accepting Adam's so-called apologies, because they are just attempts to further his religious "witnessing". He has been taught that, when it comes to converting people to his religion, the ends justify the means. Lying, name-calling, ignorance, apologizing-whatever it takes to keep you from walking off.
Think about this-if I had pulled half the stuff Adam has pulled in his posts, because I didn't say, with a tear in my eye,"I love you, please forgive me.", would you have been as forgiving to me?

[SkeptiJess]

Adam, I'm going to give you a lesson that will help you get along on this board. Look at your keyboard. Okay? Now find the 'I', the 'M' and the 'O'. These letters stand for "in my opinion." Whenever you want to post something, type those letters first. IE: "IMO, Catholics aren't Christians" or "IMO, you'd better Turn or Burn." See, then you aren't spouting lies, you're spouting opinions. IMO, they are ill-informed and bigoted opinions but, hey, at least they're properly labeled.

------------------
Jess
Full of 'satiable curtiosity

[Monty]

Jess: IMO, it's a waste of time to explain the concept of opinion to Adam. I've tried numerous times and when it comes to the Bible, he just refuses to accept that the folks reading it to him weren't present at the times described.

Adam: Personally against you? No. Against your type? Yes. Please review PLDennison's excellent riposte to you when you called him a type for further edification.

- You've borne false witness a number of times. The most amusing incident is when you stated as fact what you believed the Mormons to teach. Yet, when proven to you that was not a fact, you then stated that you did not have to read their books to know what it says. That's a false witness.

- You select and choose from both the Old and New Testaments and yet you wonder why some of us query you on that. C&P is an art, not a theological discipline.

- Again, I say to you: read the Koran for its advice. As I've said earlier, I couldn't care less what faith, if any, you follow. However, you constantly do what the Koran tells folks not to: Speaking of God what ye know not.

I should have never said anything to Monty in public. But he twisted my words in public, so maybe it was a good thing to bring it out? I'm not sure. It's too late anyway, the cat's out of the bag.

I have never taken someone's words, and then twisted them to mean something else as Monty has done to me. Monty, were you doing it as a joke? If so, perhaps you could have told me before I got upset?

And I think I'll start using that "IMO" acronym more often. Thanks for the advice Jess. :)

Sorry I got you all tangled in my spat with Monty. (Or whatever you want to call it)

Adam

[tomndebb]

Arg220:Anyway, what do you mean I bore (beared?) false witness? Did I ever lie about another religion? To the best of my knowledge, I didn't. You may not agree with what I say, and it may anger you that I'm right, but it doesn't make me a liar.

(It's bore false witness.)

A couple of months back you posted that Catholics believe that they are saved by works. This is a common falsehood spouted by fundies, and perhaps you were unaware then that it was not true. However, several people, not all of them Catholic pointed out your error. Since then, you have repeated the lie on more than one occasion despite the fact that you have been corrected on each occasion.

Most recently, you posted that Catholics "worship" Mary and the pope. While a few misguided Catholics may worship Mary (probably the same percent of Catholics as there are fundies handling venomous snakes) there are NO Catholics who "worship" the pope. The official teaching of the Church is that we do not worship Mary.

You continue to post falsehoods. For some of this stuff, it may be ignorance (although, considering that this site is dedicated to correct information, willful ignorance comes off looking like arrogant stupidity). However, for the "saved by works" falsehood, you have been shown that it is wrong on multiple occasions--therefore it is not ignorance, but a lie.

In contrast, SoxFan59 and I have discussed (and disagreed about) the notion of prayer to Mary and the saints. His position is that there is no Scriptural basis for asking for a saint to intercede for one (which is the basis of the Catholic "prayer" to saints). He, however, while never backing down on the points that he has made, has never simply leveled the charge of idolatry or false worship and run away without backing up his statements. That is your method: "If I don't actually engage in honest discussion, I don't have to admit that I don't know what I'm talking about and I can continue to say whatever I want and just claim 'ignorance' for my lies."

You have made similar statements about other religions. As Monty has pointed out, when you have been referred to a site that can present their viewpoint, you usually post that you looked around and fled before Satan got you, or words to that effect. The problem with that attitude is that you wind up posting what some other bigoted fundie told you about the other religion rather than what the other religion actually believes.

I have no problem discussing the differences between Judaism and Christianity with Dex or Rowan--even when we obviously disagree over a point on which only one of us could possibly be correct. I can discuss the different approaches to God taken by Evangelical and Fundamentalist Christians vs Catholic Christians with Sox, because we treat our differences as points to be examined and we don't insist that we know what the other person believes better than they do. (Note that Sox is a Fundamentalist, not a fundie.)

Sorry. You look like one of the followers of the Nine Commandments to me.

------------------
Tom~

[Monty]

Thank you, Tom.

About Catholics, I said (in this very thread mind you):Catholics. Catholics believe in many things that are not in the Bible. They have added so much ritual, and so much emptiness to the faith that it's not even funny. They also go against the very teachings of Jesus. They believe that salvation is based on works. This is directly opposite to what Jesus says. They pray to Mary, and pray to the saints. In doing so, they exalt those humans to the level of Jesus, and the Father. This is also DIRECTLY opposite to what the Bible says.

Tom says:Most recently, you posted that Catholics "worship" Mary and the pope.
More twisting of my words. Is this the theme now? If you look above, you'll see that I said that Catholics "pray to Mary, and pray to the saints." I really, really hope that you're not going to deny that Catholics pray to Mary.

All this talk about me lying, yet you guys misinterpret what I say, and it makes ME look bad. Can ya guys do me a favor, and stop putting words in my mouth? Thank you.

P.S. Haven't you read my apology in GD? I'm a changed man Tom. If you notice, after that post in GD, I've been different. Compare my posts, you'll see the difference.

Adam

[Monty]

Um, Adam? Rapture ain't in the Bible either, chil'. Also, reference your comment about Catholicism being empty faith: faith without works is dead faith, perchance "dead" in this case means empty?

Gee, I wonder who said that faith without works is dead and in what book?

I really think you might want to retreat just a tad more before you launch into any type of theological debate with the esteemed denizens/netizens of the Straight Dope Message Board. After all, a few of them have studied the subject for a blame lot longer than you've been alive. Also, their teachers were competent.

[pricciar]

Ummmm, Adam, check out your own quote. You say that Catholics "exalt" Mary to a level equal to Jesus and God, that certainly sounds like worship to me.
Now, I can understand that you didn't _mean_ to say Catholics worshipped Mary, but reading that quote certainly makes it sound like thats what you were saying.

Also, I guess you failed to spot the fact that in that quote you say that Catholics think they are saved by works, which Tom has already informed you is incorrect.

Noone twisted your words around. Ok, Monty had some fun with the 12 year old comment. But, for the most part your own words have come back to strangle you.

You mention that you have changed, well, I do agree, but this last post is back to the old walk. You quote yourself spreading incorrect information. Ignoring the corrections as if you hadn't heard them. In order for there to be a conversation, both parties have to listen, Adam, are you listening? Tom wasn't attacking you, he was correcting some some of your assumptions. You can listen to him and gain new knowledge, which doesn't mean you have to change your beliefs, you will just have new facts to intelligently discuss those beliefs. Or, you can stick with your old incorrect information and hurl stones at objects you barely understand.

pat

[tomndebb]

Adam, I saw a post recently where someone claimed Catholics "worshipped" Mary and the pope. If you were not that author and I simply confused your statements, here, with that other author then I apologize for that.

However: (as pricciar has noted) in the very same post you again quote yourself claiming "They believe that salvation is based on works."

If you cannot force yourself to quit posting this lie, I am going to continue to place you among the rest of the Believers of Nine Commandments. (After all, all true Biblical Literalists handle venomous snakes, right?)

As to praying to saints: it is an act of requesting intercession, not an act of worship. The word pray is used in the context of «to request», not «to worship». You do not have to agree with that. You do not have to accept that the RCC has good theology on this point. To claim that "they exalt those humans to the level of Jesus, and the Father," however, is to simply refuse to look at what the RCC teaches. As noted above, SoxFan59 and I only came to an agreement to disagree in our ealier discussion, but he, at least, did not make judgments from ignorance about the attitudes and teachings of the RCC.

As to your "new attitude," I see you posting ignorance as fact, then reposting the same lies while defending yourself. You'll have to do better than that before I believe that you have done anything but "tone down" your bigotry and lies.

(Pat may have been mistaken when he said I was not attacking you. On the other hand, I will generally ignore most Catholic bashing as long as it does not include direct and repeated lies. I'm afraid you have passed my standard tolerance level. A lot of people disagree with Catholic teaching: Jews, Atheists, Protestants, Muslims, (some Catholics), among many others. I will let pass any statement that describes the RCC position as wrong--as long as it correctly identifies the RCC position. Your knowledge of the RCC is based on hearsay from ignorant (and often hateful) people. Until you learn what any other group believes, I would suggest that you simply say that your beliefs are different without attempting to describe their beliefs.)

------------------
Tom~

[Monty]

Snarkberry: it would have taken guts had the apology been real. As it is, it was just another in a long line of lies by our buddy, Adam. "The ends justify the means" is wrong. Too bad Adam doesn't understand that.

Monty, I agree that Adam has made mistakes. Of that, there can be no doubt. And he has been willfully ignorant of other faiths, as you said, and he has spoken of God what he knew not (IMO). But I'm willing to give him as many chances as possible to change the way he looks at things. Like I said in my above post, change usually doesn't happen all at once. And believe me, if God can tolerate me and is willing to forgive me for the things I have done, I should certainly be willing to forgive others. To not forgive Adam would be the greater sin. Jesus said something to the effect of, forgive seventy-times-seven. And in the D&C, he said "of you it is required to forgive all men" (D&C 64:10). I think that's a pretty solid scriptural basis for forgiving and loving Adam in spite of his errors, however willful they seem to be.

I'm not trying to lecture you, because God knows I need to work on this part of the gospel as well, BADLY. I'm just explaining my position. "Forgive to be forgiven" is a gospel law. I MUST forgive Adam if I want forgiveness for MY sins. Selfish? Maybe so. But I'm no saint and I really need forgiveness, so that's the path I must travel.

Tom: Thanks for the apology. It means even more since it wasn't neccesary. And I really should stop shooting my mouth off about the Catholic church. The honest truth is that everyone that's Catholic says that "if I'm a good person, then I'm going to heaven." (At least, that's what the dozens of Catholics I've talked to say)

James (the apostle) says that faith without works is dead. I agree with that totally. But it just SEEMED to me that all Catholics thought they could work their way into heaven. I'm curious about something Tom. If somebody asked you, "How do I get to heaven?" What would your response be?

Bill: Welcome back. :) And thanks for the advice.

Monty: -sigh- Are you one of those people that trusts nobody? It's as if my word means nothing to you. You're basically calling my apology "fake." And I'll never understand why.

Adam

[VegForLife]

And I really should stop shooting my mouth off about the Catholic church. The honest truth is that everyone that's Catholic says that "if I'm a good person, then I'm going to heaven."

My god, Adam, are you really so dense as to not see the contradiction in those two sentences strung together?

(At least, that's what the dozens of Catholics I've talked to say)

And are you even the ten times more dense you'd need to be to not understand how this has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on "what Catholics believe?"

Geez, I was willing to give you another chance. But now I'm really starting to think that you're just a moron. I mean, literally. A moron. Seriously.

Rich

[Dirty Devil]

Snarkberry said - "And believe me, if God can tolerate me and is willing to forgive me for the things I have done, I should certainly be willing to forgive others."

How do you know that god tolerates you and has forgiven you? I mean this with all honesty. I'm an agnostic (borderline athiest), and I'm curious as to how you know what god thinks about you.

[Byzantine]

I always thought you had to buy your way into heaven. That's what the preachers on TV say.

Dirty Devil wrote:

Snarkberry said - "And believe me, if God can tolerate me and is willing to forgive me for the things I have done, I should certainly be willing to forgive others."
How do you know that god tolerates you and has forgiven you? I mean this with all honesty. I'm an agnostic (borderline athiest), and I'm curious as to how you know what god thinks about you.

I didn't say that God tolerates and has forgiven me...I said "IF" he can do those things, which I believe he can, eventually.

If you want to know how God communicates with mankind through personal revelation, ask the LDS missionaries in your area. They can give you a much better answer than I can, because I've lived a mostly wicked life myself and have disqualified myself from having personal revelation. If and when God does forgive me, I will again be eligible for personal revelation in my life. Until then, I'm basically on my own, blind.

The missionaries are in the phone book under The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Hi, I'm back from my short pilgrimage to my personal "Mecca" in search of forgiveness from God for my many sins. I've found that this is something that is inseparable from time, and so I feel that I can contribute to this message board in the meantime.

Adam, you say you're a "changed man." What I have found is that change is usually a slow and often painful process, not a sudden transformation into someone who's 100% better than he was before. As one who has needed to change drastically (turn or burn!) and who continues to have this need, I can tell you, you don't go from Point A to Point Z without passing through Point B, Point C, etc.

Keep trying! I think it's great that you had the guts to post that apology. Many people wouldn't. I'm sure you will fit in on this MB with such a good attitude, if you will stick to it. If you should stumble and fall, get up again. That's my advice to you. :::Getting down off soapbox:::

(And BTW, you're not the only one who has come under fire for expressing religious views on the SDMB. Yours truly went through such a period too when I first came onto the AOL SDMB. Live and learn....)

Oops! I meant "come under fire for expressing INTOLERANT religious views...." Sorry for the missing word.

[Kat]

And I really should stop shooting my mouth off about the Catholic church.

Yes, you should.

{quote]The honest truth is that everyone that's Catholic says that "if I'm a good person, then I'm going to heaven."[/quote]

1) No.
2) Go back and read the first quote from you in this message and think about what it means.

(At least, that's what the dozens of Catholics I've talked to say)

I doubt it. Even if they have, it's not likely "Catholics ARG has talked to" is a representative sample.

[Monty]

Kat: maybe "Catholics ARG has talked to" really is a representative sample.

Now, if it had been "Catholics ARG has listened to," that would be a different story.

[Monty]

From Adam:

Monty: -sigh- Are you one of those people that trusts nobody?

No. Amongst those I don't trust, however, is you. There are those I trust.

It's as if my word means nothing to you.

Your word means exactly zero to me.

You're basically calling my apology "fake."

Simple answer: It was fake as you've so aptly proven within 24 hours of "apologizing." You might have noticed I'm not the only one who's pointed that out.

And I'll never understand why.

That's because you don't listen. Listening leads to learning. I'm now firmly convinced that you are incapable of learning as you've proven you don't listen. Start listening and stop shooting your mouth off about things which you have exactly zero correct knowledge and then maybe, just maybe, folks will start to believe you're sincere.

Until that happens, I will continue to point out that you lie and that your apology isn't sincere.

[Stoid]

Adam;

Just a small point... You seem to believe that Catholics believe that "works" will get them into heaven, while YOU believe that faith will get you there. Ok.

But did you ever consider the illogic of this judgment? If someone believes they are getting into heaven, or that there is a way in, or that heaven even exists, then isn't it quite obvious that the FAITH part is already in place? They already have faith that God exists, and that heaven exists. It's a done deal as far as that goes, and if what YOu believ is true, then anything they think or do after that is meaningless...isn't it better that they believe they must do good, whether that be true or no? I find that much more appealign than the idea that simple belief in and of itself is sufficient!

So whether it is true or it isn't true that they believe works will get you into heaven (and they've said it isn't a million times, but...whatever) why do you judge it so much? It is a BENIGN belief. It is even a GOOD belief, because it theoretically drives Catholics to be better people.

H

Anybody here remember Steppenwolf (not the Herman Hesse book, either):

The world at last grew weary

Of its doubtful state of mind

So it summoned from far and called them near

All the wise men thought to be sincere;

To heal its wounds and make it whole,

And lead the way back to the Soul.

(Refrain)

So the wise men came together

With the hope to free mankind

From the rubbish that had gathered in God's name

To embrace and trust each other

In a search for the Supreme

And they found that all their teachings were the same . . .


The charlatans, they stayed behind

To count their bags of gold;

And some stayed away, as if to e'en say,

"I know that my way's the only way!"

(Refrain)

And when, at last, the Word went 'round

That all were One and All

Many returned to seek the Light;

Nobody claimed that he was right.

(Refrain)

It's sad to know it's just a song;

To dream and hope, still can't be wrong . . .

(Final refrain)

[vanillanice]

Now its time for arg to start on the Jehovas Witnesses.

Stoidela: Catholics, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, AND SO I'VE HEARD FROM actual people, is that you must be part of the Catholic church to get into heaven. Also, that you must perform all the sacraments. (I'm not really clear on what these are exactly. I think it's communion, baptism, confession, marriage...although not in that order) Please note again, that this is what others have told me. (MANY others)

James says that "Faith without works is dead." All followers of Christ are called to do the will of the Father. Please understand that Fundamentalists believe that you must persevere in the faith, and work for God. However, we do not believe that you must be baptised in a certain church, or perform certain rituals to gain entrance into heaven. We (I) believe that if you call on the name of Jesus, you will be saved. But it doesn't stop there. you must live the life of a Christian, and "overcome" in this world. (Revelation chaps 1-3)

I'm still waiting for Tom to answer me about entrance into heaven. I really want to know what the official RCC teaches on the matter. Is what I've heard from people true? That being part of the RCC is the only way to eternal life? Or are these members of the Catholic church ignorant of their own faith? I need Tom to set me straight. (Or Pickman, or anybody else with knowledge of the official teachings)

I hope none of you are upset at this post. The Catholic beliefs I have mentioned were conveyed to me by many people I have spoken to in "real life." I do not know whether they are accurate or not. And that is what I intend to find out from Tom, or anyone else. So, again I ask: What must a Catholic do, to gain entrance into heaven, according to the official teachings of the RCC. Thanks. (If you want to start a new thread on the subject, be my guest)

Adam

[VegForLife]

We (I) believe that if you call on the name of Jesus, you will be saved.

Ah, I see, so you can't "work" your way into heaven.

But it doesn't stop there. you must live the life of a Christian, and "overcome" in this world.

Ah, I see, so you *have* to work your way into heaven.

It's all clear now.

Rich

[tomndebb]

ARG220:I'm still waiting for Tom to answer me about entrance into heaven. I really want to know what the official RCC teaches on the matter.
Well, I believe that your original question was what I would tell someome who asked what it took to be saved. I did not answer right away because I was trying to figure out which of the dozen or so answers I could give to that question would be most appropriate.

You have now defined the question a bit more narrowly, and I will tackle that.

(First, a quick note. The last time a priest (at least in the U.S.) claimed that only Catholics could get into heaven, the Church excommunicated him for heresy: Fr. Feeney in Boston nearly 50 years ago.)

Can anyone "earn" their way into heaven?
No. Augustine of Hippo settled that question in the early fifth century in his fight with Pelagius. Salvation comes only from God. People cannot even ask for Salvation, we can only accept or reject that which God offers to all people.

Where do the Sacraments fit?
Sacraments are special acts of worship which allow God and humans to interact, resulting in the people recognizing that God has filled their lives with grace. The RCC, probably better than any other western Christian religious group, recognizes that drama and ritual are excellent ways of conveying meaning and reinforcing belief. Each of the Sacraments is deliberately written in a dramatic mode. (There was a fair amount of accretion to those rituals between the 12th and 20th centuries, but most of that has been cleaned up since the Second Vatican Council.) The RCC believes very firmly that the Pauline "Body of Christ" is real in the community of believers. The Sacraments are always expressed in the context of the Church/Faith Community/Body of Christ. Failing to recognize this point causes all sorts of problems when people discuss the Sacraments. For example, the RCC does not teach that one has to confess one's sins to a priest to obtain forgiveness. The teaching of the Church is that the moment that a person is truly sorry for having sinned, God immediately forgives the person. However, the relationship of person to God is not merely a singular, private experience. There is also the relationship to God in the entire community of the Body of Christ. For this relationship to be made whole, the sorrow for sin must be expressed to that community. Rather than having every person stand up and declaim all of their sinful actions publicly, each person is allowed to express their sorrow to the representative of The Body of Christ (i.e., the community and God), the priest, who then confirms the Reconciliation of the sinner with the community. "Confession" is formally known as the Rite of Reconciliation.

If someone believes that all connection between a person and God is a purely private activity, then none of this makes sense, of course. However, if you believe in The Body of Christ, what do you do to participate in it?

Who is saved?
Everyone has been saved by the actions of Jesus. From the Catechism of the Catholic Church(quoting the encyclicalLumen Gentium:836 All men are called to this catholic unity of the People of God. . . . And to it, in different ways, belong or are ordered: the Catholic fiathful, others who believe in Christ, and finally all mankind, called by God's grace to salvation.

In other words, everyone is called to be saved. In the "belong or ordered" phrase, above, Catholics, and then other Christians, are not called to be first to be saved, but are given more responsibilities to carry out God's Word. It is always possible to reject salvation, but salvation is not limited to a small number of "believers."

The Catholic Church takes seriously the statement of Jesus that no one can come to the Father except through Him. We also take seriously, Jesus's words concerning "many mansions" and Paul's statements in Romans 2 concerning the justification of those who are not Christian. Those who are Christian have a serious responsibility to act in a "Christlike" manner and will be held accountable for their failures, but only God will determine who is actually saved. A person who is following their view of "the good" is, in the eyes of the RCC, following the call of Jesus, even if they do not express a belief in Jesus or even in God. The RCC believes that Catholics are following the wishes of God more closely than others [duh, who would stick with a group that said that they were almost as good as the next group over], but it leaves to God the decision of which persons have actually accepted salvation in their own ways.

One problem with the expression of the Catholic faith in the U.S. has been that the RCC outgrew its educational resources a long time ago. A great many people grew up Catholic with a rather poor understanding of what the RCC teaches on many levels. The Baltimore Catechism of the 1890's was an attempt to address this problem, but it was written in a fixed language that was not adaptable to the experiences of the 20th century. When the social upheavals of the 1960's occurred, a great many Catholic schools closed, leaving another gap in the ability of the RCC to pass on its traditions to an educated populace. It is quite possible to hear lots of strange things from Catholics. On the other hand, there are even stranger things being said by hate groups such as are found at www.chick.com. (http://www.chick.com.)

On the other hand, using phrases such as "empty rituals" in total ignorance of the wealth of meaning conveyed in those rituals will hardly endear you to people of whose beliefs you are quite ignorant.

------------------
Tom~

[Big Iron]

[[ Catholics, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, AND SO I'VE HEARD FROM actual people, is that you must be part of the Catholic church to get into heaven.]] Arg


That is not what the Catholic Church teaches, and quite frankly I don't think you are telling the truth about what these "actual people" supposedly told you. The Church teaches that you may belong to just about any religion under the sun and still get to heaven.

[Fretful Porpentine]

"Catholics, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, AND SO I'VE HEARD FROM actual people, is that you must be part of the Catholic church to get into heaven. Also, that you must perform all the sacraments. (I'm not really clear on what these are exactly. I think it's communion, baptism, confession, marriage...although not in that order)"

ARG, time for a quick lesson in critical thinking. Your belief that Holy Matrimony is a sacrament is correct. Now, think carefully ... what do we know about Catholic priests?

Choose the correct conclusion:

1) Catholics believe that priests don't go to heaven.

2) The "actual people" who gave you this tidbit of information about Catholicism were lying, or seriously misinformed.

Oh, never mind, you probably picked #1 ...

Tom: Thank you. Your post was quite informative. I do, however, feel the need to point out a couple things.
In the "belong or ordered" phrase, above, Catholics, and then other Christians, are not called to be first to be saved, but are given more responsibilities to carry out God's Word. It is always possible to reject salvation, but salvation is not limited to a small number of "believers."
So, does this translate as, "God will give you work, and THEN you'll be saved?" Maybe you could clarify this for me.
A person who is following their view of "the good" is, in the eyes of the RCC, following the call of Jesus, even if they do not express a belief in Jesus or even in God. This sentence hit me like a smack in the face. And this is where we run into many problems. According to this Tom, somebody doesn't even have to believe in Jesus to follow Jesus. ??? Maybe you said that wrong, and I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Because that makes absolutely no sense to me at all.

I'm out of time for now, and I'll continue this post at a later time.

Adam

[tomndebb]

ARG220:So, does this translate as, "God will give you work, and THEN you'll be saved?" Maybe you could clarify this for me.
The statement to which you refer is not directly tied to Salvation, as such. It refers to the tasks assigned to or obligations placed upon believers. Those who understand more of what God wants are called upon to work harder to carry out God's word. Salvation comes through Jesus, period. If you are Christian, you have more of a responsibility to carry out God's work/plan/goal/whatever than if you are not Christian. Salvation does not come through works, but belief carries responsibility.


tomndebb:A person who is following their view of "the good" is, in the eyes of the RCC, following the call of Jesus, even if they do not express a belief in Jesus or even in God.
ARG220:This sentence hit me like a smack in the face. And this is where we run into many problems. According to this Tom, somebody doesn't even have to believe in Jesus to follow Jesus. ???
I am not surprised that you have trouble with the concept. (Accepting the concept if you do understand it is a different isue.)

In short, Yes. God works in His own way. It is the belief of the RCC that the Spirit of God is in the world, encouraging people to do right. Many never hear the call; others do hear the call without necessarily hearing or understanding the Christian message. If you want to limit God by denying that possibility, go ahead. Based on everything you've posted, I would not expect you to accept this idea. On the other hand, it is not something that the RCC simply "made up." We can point to Scriptural precedents for this message (Romans 2--especially 2:14-16, God prompting Melchizedek to honor God's victory through Abraham despite the fact that Melchizedek was not among those chosen by God through Abraham, etc.).
You are free to dispute our conclusions and our interpretation of Scripture, of course, but you are not free to say we invented it. As to your ability to understand it--I can't control your understanding or your belief.

------------------
Tom~

Ok, where did I leave off. Tom says:
One problem with the expression of the Catholic faith in the U.S. has been that the RCC outgrew its educational resources a long time ago. A great many people grew up Catholic with a rather poor understanding of what the RCC teaches on many levels.
This makes perfect sense to me. And it would explain the ignorance of the Catholics that I've spoken to.

Big Iron: You said:The Church teaches that you may belong to just about any religion under the sun and still get to heaven.
Ok, first, are you Catholic? And if so, then could you explain how being Hindu, or Jew, or Muslim...etc, get's you into heaven.

Tom says that :The Catholic Church takes seriously the statement of Jesus that no one can come to the Father except through Him.
So, this contradicts your statement on what the RCC teaches, does it not? I think perhaps, that one of you is wrong. OR, that you're both right, and there are teachings in the RCC that contradict one another. ??? Maybe one of you could staighten me out on this point.

Big Iron: Maybe your statement on the teachings of the "Church" is similar to my statments on "saved Catholics, and saved Jews." But still, if one holds to the major tenets of another religion besides Christianity, then they most certainly do not believe that Jesus is the only way to heaven. So, like I said, maybe you could clear things up for me a bit.

Fretful: I don't know much about the Sacraments at all. (In fact, I can't even list them) So, your question confuses me. The only thing that seems certain is that the people I've spoken to, were confused about their own religion.

Adam

Tom: So, let me see if I understand this correctly. You're saying that it's possible to obey the law, and do good, even without believing in God. I understand this concept. It would be like me somehow following all the Ten Commandments, but never realizing they came from God, right?

This teaching, in and of itself, is not so bad. However, when you teach it, alongside the teachings of Jesus, it makes no sense at all. And I say that because believing in Jesus is the only way to heaven in the first place. (Which you already knew)

After reading Romans 2, I could see how this supports the RCC teaching. But as you know, it is dangerous to pick and chose Scripture to fit your needs. That passage in Romans must be read with the full knowledge of God's will, and the will of His Son Jesus. And of course, you know that the real "Law" says that you must believe in the Son to enter the kingdom.

I guess there's no other way I can explain myself here. You're right in that I don't understand the concept of "following Jesus, but not believing in Him." It's really not even logical, if you think about it. Paul says in Romans 2 that the Gentiles follow SOME of the law without knowing it (my paraphrasing). But then again, so do Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and many other religions. I mean, I'm sure that most religions teach that you should love your neighbor, and help the poor. Are you saying that every religion that teaches this is truly follwing Jesus?

My head hurts from trying to put myself in your shoes Tom. I understand where the church got the idea. But I truly believe that it's a misinterpretation of Scripture.

Adam

[Big Iron]

{{[[A person who is following their view of "the good" is, in the eyes of the RCC, following the call of Jesus, even if they do not express a belief in Jesus or even in God.]] Tom


This sentence hit me like a smack in the face.}} Arg


Too just and logical for you, huh?

{{ And this is where we run into many problems. According to this Tom, somebody doesn't even have to believe in Jesus to follow Jesus. ??? Maybe you said that wrong, and I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Because that makes absolutely no sense to me at all. }}

You are actually admitting that you can't comprehend the idea of following the path set by another without knowing anything in particular about the one who made the path, or believing said trail-blazer was "God"?

[Big Iron]

{{[[One problem with the expression of the Catholic faith in the U.S. has been that the RCC outgrew its educational resources a long time ago. A great many people grew up Catholic with a rather poor understanding of what the RCC teaches on many levels.]] Tom


This makes perfect sense to me. And it would explain the ignorance of the Catholics that I've spoken to. }} Arg


So what's your excuse?

{{[[The Church teaches that you may belong to just about any religion under the sun and still get to heaven.]] Arizona Ranger


Ok, first, are you Catholic?}}


I was raised Catholic, but I've since wised up and don't waste my time on organized religion except as an academic matter -- except, of course, for J.R. "Bob" Dobbs' mighty Church of the SubGenius, the One True Church, and my own personal First Church of Floyd, Barber, which is even oner and truer than Dobbs'.


[[ And if so, then could you explain how being Hindu, or Jew, or Muslim...etc, get's you into heaven. ]]


The point, which you adamantly refuse to get because you seem to think that "salvation" is primarily a matter of being in the right fan club rather than living a righteous life of decency toward others, is that "being" of a particular reason doesn't get you anywhere in and of itself. The Mother Church, however, teaches that, no matter what religion, a person can still get to heaven with the appropriately good heart and life.


[[Big Iron: Maybe your statement on the teachings of the "Church" is similar to my statments on "saved Catholics, and saved Jews." But still, if one holds to the major tenets of another religion besides Christianity, then they most certainly do not believe that Jesus is the only way to heaven. So, like I said, maybe you could clear things up for me a bit.]]


You don't need to think that Jesus is the only way to heaven, you just need to follow the basic path described -- do unto others as you would have them do unto you (and really mean it in your heart). Love thy brother as thyself.

[Monty]

For those of you who may still think ARG220 was telling the truth when he "apologized," please see his last few posts above. Also, pleaee key in on his statement "ignorance of the Catholics."

For Snarkberry: you cited the same part of the D&C I told ARG220 was one of the most beautiful aspects of the LDS faith, but in your citing of it, I think you left out another portion of the D&C which obviously applies in this case. Isn't there another part of the D&C which tells us how to treat those who prove they're not sincere?

Monty wrote:

For those of you who may still think ARG220 was telling the truth when he "apologized," please see his last few posts above. Also, pleaee key in on his statement "ignorance of the Catholics."

I'm hoping that he will stick to his apology in general, even so.

For Snarkberry: you cited the same part of the D&C I told ARG220 was one of the most beautiful aspects of the LDS faith, but in your citing of it, I think you left out another portion of the D&C which obviously applies in this case. Isn't there another part of the D&C which tells us how to treat those who prove they're not sincere?

Well, there's the biblical and extra-biblical "wiping the dust off" of shoes, and the commandment not to cast pearls to the swine (and no, before anyone flames me for saying that, I don't think Adam is "swine" literally--just an analogy, not to give things of great worth to those who will not be receptive to or understand them). That's all I can think of at the moment. Were you thinking of those, or of a different passage?

Monty: Oh, duh, you're talking about me, not Adam. Point well taken. I do need to be more sincere and less hypocritical. Gimme some time, dammit. Sheesh!

[Fretful Porpentine]

"Fretful: I don't know much about the Sacraments at all. (In fact, I can't even list them) So, your question confuses me. The only thing that seems certain is that the people I've spoken to, were confused about their own religion."

My point was that you don't HAVE to know much about the sacraments to figure out that what you were told is ridiculous. Marriage, as you indicated in your post, is a sacrament. Therefore, IF Catholics believed that nobody got to heaven without receiving all seven sacraments, they would believe that no non-married people were going to heaven. It should be obvious that they don't, in fact, believe anything of the sort.

Incidentally, Holy Orders (being ordained as a priest) is also a sacrament. So it's HIGHLY unusual for one person to receive all the sacraments. (And yes, your friends are confused.)

[GLWasteful]

Adam:Catholics, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, AND SO I'VE HEARD FROM actual people, is that
you must be part of the Catholic church to get into heaven. ::snip:: Please note again, that this is what others have told me. (MANY others)
And where did you encounter these actual people? In your church community, perhaps? If so, That goes a long way toward explaining why you were given incorrect information.


Is what I've heard from people true? That being part of the RCC is the only way to eternal life? Or are these members of the Catholic church ignorant of their own faith?
No, what you have been told is not true. Which should come as no real surprise, since so much of what you have been told and subsequently parroted is not true.


I need Tom to set me straight. (Or Pickman, or anybody else with knowledge of the official teachings)
Or, you know, anyone who goes and searches out information, instead of relying on what they're told by people who claim to be Catholic.


The Catholic beliefs I have mentioned were conveyed to me by many people I have spoken to in "real life."
And since real life appears in quotes, I must ask again, did you meet these folk through your church?


And, inre Tom's statement of RCC doctrine:Because that makes absolutely no sense to me at all.
Which is not at all surprising, Adam. You are incapable of accepting that there are others who do not feel as you do. Indeed, that there are others whose beliefs are opposed to yours who consider themselves Christians.


And to Bob:Ok, first, are you Catholic? And if so, then could you explain how being Hindu, or Jew, or Muslim...etc, get's you into heaven.
And a better question, posed to you, Adam, would be, "Why does being Hindu, Jew or Muslim automatically assure you that you're not going to heaven?" Because you were told so? By whom?


To Tom:So, let me see if I understand this correctly. You're saying that it's possible to obey the law, and do good, even without believing in God. I understand this concept.
So you say, Adam. I don't believe for a moment, though, that you actually do.


It would be like me somehow following all the Ten Commandments, but never realizing they came from God, right?
Or accepting that they were set out by others before the Bible got around to printing them up, yeah.


This teaching, in and of itself, is not so bad. However, when you teach it, alongside the teachings of Jesus, it makes no sense at all.
::Sigh:: To you it makes no sense. This all goes back to accepting that others feel differently, and also consider themselves right.


But as you know, it is dangerous to pick and chose Scripture to fit your needs.
Good advice, Adam. Maybe you could point this out to your pastor, and any others who use the bible to uphold their own beliefs and denigrate those of others.

Waste
Flick Lives!

Monty: What is it with you anyway? I swear you'll not stop until I'm gone from this board. We understand that you don't trust me, and you think my apology was fake. Do you have to keep repeating it, and repeating it? I'm not bashing in my posts here. I'm asking questions, and really trying to learn. Even though I am really trying to understand the teachings of the RCC, they confuse me greatly.

Big Iron/Tom: While still considering what you've said about following Jesus, could you please interpret this verse for me: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." John 14:6

Could you also interpret Matthew 21-23 for me? (It's a little long to type out right now)

Here are some more verses that you may find interesting: Luke 18:9-14 (Parable of the Pharisee and Tax Collector); John 8:31-32; 14:6,12,15,21; 15:15; Ephesians 2:1-10; 1John 2:3-6; 4:15; 5:1.

Big Iron: Who is Arizona Ranger? Is that you? Because you used it after your own quote. I'm just wondering.

Adam

[tomndebb]

ARG220:After reading Romans 2, I could see how this supports the RCC teaching. But as you know, it is dangerous to pick and chose Scripture to fit your needs. That passage in Romans must be read with the full knowledge of God's will, and the will of His Son Jesus. And of course, you know that the real "Law" says that you must believe in the Son to enter the kingdom.
Well, see, I would accuse you of picking and choosing the Scripture you want to believe. You have fixed on the idea that you specifically have to accept Jesus in some sort of special "Christian" way in order to come to God. I say that the Scripture shows that God has chosen people that are outside the Jewish and Christian traditions and that your idea of Salvation is intended, specifically, to those people who do hear and understand the Word that they are called upon to respond--and if they choose not to respond, then they are damned. ("Hearing" in this case is of the heart; a person who gets preached at but who does not discover the truth of the message in his/her heart is not bound by that.) On the other hand, God is present throughout the world, and we are presumptuous if we put limits on what He can or will do to move other people to come to Him.

You are a Biblical Literalist; I am not. I suspect that you pick the narrow verses that justify your actions in your mind while ignoring the greater message; you suspect that I am watering down the strict messages of God to follow my own path. We are not going to agree on this. My only point, originally, was that you continue to make claims about Catholicism that are false. I've been over all this long before you were born and I'm not going to be persuaded by any arguments you present that I've already heard. Similarly, I doubt that I can better explain this in a way that you will understand.

For example, you make the following point:
Tom says that :

The Catholic Church takes seriously the statement of Jesus that no one can come to the Father except through Him.

So, this contradicts your statement on what the RCC teaches, does it not? I think perhaps, that one of you is wrong. OR, that you're both right, and there are teachings in the RCC that contradict one another. ??? Maybe one of you could staighten me out on this point.

Did you stop reading at that point? Continue through the rest of that paragraph.
In fact, the RCC believes that Jesus is in the world in a mystical fashion through the Body of Christ. We also do not believe that the Spirit is limited to following the actions of specific human Christians. You believe that a person has to hear the specific words of Jesus and then perform some physical declaration to "accept" those words in order to be Saved. We believe that all people are called by the presence of Jesus even if they have not heard his words preached, physically, and that the impulse to do good is driven by that call. It is not a contradiction; it is a different perspective (one that I am not sure you have the background to grasp at this point).

Again, we are not going to agree on this point, so there isn't much point in debating it.

The position of the RCC is not that only we few "in the club," as Bob puts it, are saved, but that the purpose of "the club" is to more effectively spread the Word of God. It is a pretty bad scandal that so much time is wasted among Christians bickering over points of faith rather than spreading the Word--not merely by preaching, but by working for social justice, helping people to lead better lives, and so forth. The very strict statements about who will be saved are not intended as a restriction on all people as to who will be with God: they are commands to those who do understand the Word of God to follow it, closely, themselves.

In the simplest terms I can think of:
A person who has not been granted the gift of faith in the Christian message will be saved if they follow the Spirit of God in attempting to good in their lives.
A person who has been granted the gift of faith is called to follow Jesus strictly. If you believe, but shrug off that belief as not essential to your life, you will not be saved.

In other words (one more try) the very strict messages of Jesus and Paul are aimed at believers, not the whole world of unbelievers.

I realize that this runs counter to your interpretation of Scripture, but it is quite consistent with the interpretation of a great many Christians (and not just Catholics). I do not expect you to give up your beliefs, but I find that your beliefs put a straightjacket on God: I am not willing to tell God what He can do based on a narrow reading of His Word.

------------------
Tom~

[VegForLife]

This sentence hit me like a smack in the face.

If sentences were two-by-fours what a happy world we'd have. . .

Rich

[Monty]

Snarkberry: No; I wasn't talking about you, I was talking about Adam.

Also to Snarkberry: I finally found my Portals CD-ROM (that's the one with the Standard Works on it). Reason I couldn't find it on my bookshelf was because I left it in the computer. Anyway, the part of the D&C of which I was thinking was D&C 42:25 & D&C 64:12. Essentially those are the ones that say cast out those who don't depart from their sin.

Hey, relax Snark...you're obviously trying. Adam ain't.

Adam: what's with me? You say you apologize, then you immediately attack, then you say you apologized already, then you condemn, then you say you apologized a long time ago, then you parrot bigoted, ignorant, and mistaken views.

Perhaps the reason you seem to have a problem with expressing opinions as opinions is that you appear to think that only beliefs are knowledge.

As it is, I'll be happy (and I venture that you probably will be, also) if you'd just take the advice many others here have given you. Top of that list is quit telling lies about other faiths.

[SoxFan59]

Augustine of Hippo settled that question in the early fifth century in his fight with Pelagius. Salvation comes only from God. People cannot even ask for Salvation, we can only accept or reject that which God offers to all people.>>> Tommndebb

You're sounding dangerously close to being a Calvinist here, Tom! <g>

I also think that you've oversimplified the teachings of the church in your explanation of paragraph 836 of the Catholic Catechism.

That whole section of the Catechism, in its explanation of how the Church relates to non-believers, leans toward the concepts you explain. But I would argue that while the Church is willing to accept that believers in other religions may "search among shadows and images for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, teh Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as "a preperation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life." (Par. 843) But I would argue that the only way to interpret the ultimate conclusions of the following paragraphs (pp. 844-848) is that "salvation" for non-believers only comes as the truths found in other religion leads to Christ. Par. 847 states that those, "who through no fault of their own" do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, seek God in truth "moved by grace" through the dictates of their own conscience may "acheive eternal salvation." But then you cross reference this with par. 845 and 846,and 848, which emphasize the exclusivity of the truth of the church and the need to evangelize those who do not know the truth.

Reading all that together, I condlude that the only way one who "through no fault of his own" does not know Christ, yet seeks God with a sincere heart and "moved by grace" can indeed find salvation -- but only in Christ revealing Himself to that person by the power of His Spirit. I agree with you that it is not for me or anyone else to judge, but apart from Christ, there is no salvation. I challenge you or anyone to cite specifics in the Catechism or elsewhere in officially sanctioned Catholic doctrine which says otherwise.

Even without the Catechism, the Bible teaches me this, in Romans 1:18-20.

I don't mean to pick a fight here. I actually think you and I might agree on our conclusion. But there is no truth seperate from Christ, for even the truth in other faiths is simply a precursor to this ultimate truth. (see par. 843). ARG may be ignorant, but he did focus on a potential fudge factor in your explanation that can be fodder for theological liberalism. Most of my knowledgable Catholic friends would completely disagree with the concept that one can find salvation apart from Christ. HOW that salvation is found or understood in the mind of the believer might differ, and cultural digressions can make what is similar seem very different, but it is still salvation in Christ. John 14:6 is a universal truth. Interestingly, so is John 4: 21-24, where Christ declares that God is not worshipped in a place, or in a particular style, or by a particular ethnic group, but by "true worshipers," "in spirit and in truth."

Tom and I have disagreed about Catholic theology before. He knows we will continue to disagree. Its one of the reasons I am no longer a practicing Catholic. But there is a great deal of truth in Catholic teaching (much, much more truth than error, ARG). My concern with Tom's explanation of salvation is that it borders on a universalism that belittles the necessity of the sacrifice of Christ and faith in Him. I daresay that the Bible does not teach that, and neither does the Catholic church.

You may now return to your regularly scheduled debate over whether to execute Adam.



------------------
SoxFan59
"Its fiction, but all the facts are true!"

[voltaire]

Geez, I would have payed good money to be a SD member and a part of this discussion from its inception. I've belatedly followed this thread and the ones associated with it and it just seems so futile to jump in now at this stage. There's not much I can add that hasn't been touched upon by the many thoughtful, articulate, and most of all patient people in this forum.


P.S. Haven't you read my apology in GD? I'm a changed man Tom. If you notice, after that post in GD, I've been different. Compare my posts, you'll see the difference.


Arg, you sound like an Exxon spokesman after the Valdeez {sp?} oilspill. I recommend you begin your search for a life and a clue, preferably sooner than later.

Well SoxFan, after your post (which I can say a huge AMEN to), any argument I put up will seem like child's play. So, I think this has gone as far as it can go, at least on my end over here.

Waste: I used "real life" in quotes because this message board is real life too. The people I have spoken to include, friends, relatives, neighbors, co-workers, and complete strangers...all face to face. I've also spoken to many peope on the Internet in chat rooms on AOL, and I get the same answer every time..."If you're a good person, you go to heaven." Hey, if you think I'm lying, that your problem. But that's what people say. And even Tom admitted that there are many who are ignorant of the official teachings of the RCC.

Tom: One thing we can certainly agree on is that no one can dare "put God in a box." Or put a limit on His powers, or comprehend His ways. However, I take offense that you say I put God in a "straightjacket." On the contrary, I know the truth, and the truth has set me free. (John 8:32) Also, you and I both know that where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. (2Cor. 3:17)

Come to think of it, those verses didn't really fit that argument. ;) But they are great Scriptures anyway. :)

Adam

[tomndebb]

Sox, I freely confess to having greatly oversimplified most of my points. I am afraid that, in my opinion, efforts to provide nuance or shading or extra detail when talking to Adam results in his picking phrases to challenge out of context. (Sorry, Adam, but that's the view I get.) So I deliberately re-wove a rich and colorful tapestry using the starkest blacks and whites I could.

I have no arguments with the way that you expressed those ideas in your post.

As to the Calvin shot (and I realize it was a shot), I didn't say that God selects who will be saved, only that Salvation originates with Him. Certainly we can ask for Salvation--but only because He has inspired us to seek it. (More oversimplification.)

------------------
Tom~

Monty wrote:

Snarkberry: No; I wasn't talking about you, I was talking about Adam.

Ah, my infamous misinterpretation of people strikes again. :::sigh::: Er, um, sorry.

Anyway, the part of the D&C of which I was thinking was D&C 42:25 & D&C 64:12. Essentially those are the ones that say cast out those who don't depart from their sin.

Oh yeah, I completely forgot about those passages. But don't they just refer to members of the LDS church? How can a person who isn't a Mormon be cast out of the Mormon church? Maybe I'm misinterpreting the scripture, I don't know.

Hey, relax Snark...you're obviously trying. Adam ain't.

Thanks. Yeah, I'm trying. It's very hard to change after years of sin, too. But anyway, about Adam: it does seem like he has "backslid" on his apology and is back in the frackus (sp?). But I'm still willing to be patient with him. It's not his fault he was born into a (possibly) religiously intolerant family (and correct me if I'm wrong, Adam--I'm not trying to slander you). Jesus said he would be very tolerant of the Lamanites because of "the traditions of their fathers" in the BOM. Adam is probably just following a tradition of his own parents, as we all do to some extent. I think the sooner we can get this guy into a college, the better. :)

[Monty]

Snarkberry: that's an outstanding observation. The only problem I see is that he'll probably end up in some college run by the folks whose mistakes he parrots.

Hmmm....wonder if Adam would consider going to BYU?

[jazzmine]

*laughs*

Sure Monty, when hell freezes over. Which, btw, would end Adam's need for heaven. ;).

trisha

------------------
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice - Albert Einstein

Monty, probably not--he'd probably be too afraid that "Satan would get him" or something, LOL. (j/k, Adam).

[Czarcasm]

Everything's o.k. now, because Adam says that he is going to back off now.

For the fifteenth time.

[Big Iron]

[[Big Iron/Tom: While still considering what you've said about following Jesus, could you please interpret this verse for me: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." John 14:6]] Who Else?


Well, not that I put much stock in writings of that nature, but I imagine it has to do with going through the path of Jesus, loving your brother and all that, rather than literally meaning you have to believe Big JC was "God," etc., which would be a bit unfair, I'd say, to all those people who never fairly heard the story (quite aside from the unfairness to those who heard it and, quite reasonably, found it unconvincing).

[[Big Iron: Who is Arizona Ranger? Is that you? Because you used it after your own quote. I'm just wondering.]]


Yeah, that's me -- and you ain't no Texas Red.

[SoxFan59]

As to the Calvin shot (and I realize it was a shot), I didn't say that God selects who will be saved, only that Salvation originates with Him. Certainly we can ask for Salvation--but only because He has inspired us to seek it. (More oversimplification.)>>>> Tom

Sorry. I meant to type in a <g> in there to emphasize the "gentle jab" it was meant to be.

By the by, I find the basic debate between the "essence" of Calvinism and the "essence" of Arminianism (did I spell that right?) to be a matter of semantics. Calvinists are big on predestination, that is, God chooses who will be saved. The Arminianist types (and I believe St. Augustine would be in this camp, as well as many evangelicals like my buddy Derek Prince) believe we choose God, and embrace salvation. Calvin's side views salvation as a once and for always proposition, the other side believing that one can be saved, but fall into a sinful state once again and "lose" salvation. The latter believes that a Christian who "backslides" is again lost, while Calvin's ilk believe the "backslider" must not have ever been saved in the first place.

I think there is truth in both views, as it is all a matter of perspective. The Bible clearly supports the notion of predestination (see Romans 10 and Ephesians 1:11) but from God's omnipotent and omniscient perspective, He knows what we will and won't do anyway. From our limited perspective in time, it appears that we can accept or reject the salvation that's offered to us. The ultimate result of a believer being one with God is the same.

Unfortunatley, I've mislaid my copies of the Mormon scriptures, so I can't follow Snark and Monty's discussion. (I used to have a copy of the D&C and the attendant books published with it, but its somewhere in the cesspool/closet that is my at-home library. I did find my bundle of Gerald & Sandra Tanner tracts from my college days though!)



------------------
SoxFan59
"Its fiction, but all the facts are true!"

Big Iron (Bob) wrote:

Adam wrote:[[Big Iron/Tom: While still considering what you've said about following Jesus, could you please interpret this verse for me: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." John 14:6]] Who Else?

Well, not that I put much stock in writings of that nature, but I imagine it has to do with going through the path of Jesus, loving your brother and all that, rather than literally meaning you have to believe Big JC was "God," etc., which would be a bit unfair, I'd say, to all those people who never fairly heard the story (quite aside from the unfairness to those who heard it and, quite reasonably, found it unconvincing).

I have to disagree about this, Bob (not the part about loving your fellow man, because that's a big part of it). God is just, which means that everyone will have a legitimate chance of hearing the gospel, whether in this life or in the next. God doesn't condemn those who haven't heard this message, of course. For him to do so would be completely unfair and unjust. Everyone gets a fair chance. And Adam is right, IMHO -- the only one who can forgive you of your sins and bring you into heaven is Jesus Christ. There is no one else who can accomplish this. Christ is the only Savior.

Soxfan59 wrote:

Unfortunatley, I've mislaid my copies of the Mormon scriptures, so I can't follow Snark and Monty's discussion.

The scriptures Monty was referring to (D&C 42:28 and D&C 64:12) are saying, "he that sinneth and repenteth not shall be cast out." I had my doubts about whether this scripture meant cast out of the LDS church, or whether it meant cast out of God's presence. But the footnote to D&C 42:28 refers to "excommunication" and "punishment" in the index. Obviously Adam can't be excommunicated from a church to which he doesn't belong. As for punishment for lying about other religions (if Adam knowingly did so), that's between him and God. It's none of my business.

[SoxFan59]

I have to disagree about this, Bob (not the part about loving your fellow man, because that's a big part of it). God is just, which means that everyone will have a legitimate chance of hearing the gospel, whether in this life or in the next. >>>Monty

True. Romans 1:18-20 makes this clear. Except for the part about "in the next life." The scriptures are also clear that
"man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment" Hebrews 9:27

By the way, is this considered "witnessing?" Should this thread be transferred to the GD forum?

------------------
SoxFan59
"Its fiction, but all the facts are true!"

Soxfan59 wrote:

I have to disagree about this, Bob (not the part about loving your fellow man, because that's a big part of it). God is just, which means that everyone will have a legitimate chance of hearing the gospel, whether in this life or in the next. >>>Monty

Just to clarify things, it wasn't Monty, it was me (Snark/Bill) who wrote that.

By the way, is this considered "witnessing?" Should this thread be transferred to the GD forum?

Oops, I forgot which forum I was in. Sorry about that.

I should also note that I snipped part of Soxfan59's words above, as I didn't want to reply to the "in the next life" issue in this forum.

[Big Iron]

[[<<< I have to disagree about this, Bob (not the part about loving your fellow man, because that's a big part of it). God is just, which means that everyone will have a legitimate chance of hearing the gospel, whether in this life or in the next. >>> Snark


True. Romans 1:18-20 makes this clear. Except for the part about "in the next life." ]] Soxfan


Please -- it is a matter of unequivolcal, objective fact that everyone does NOT get a "legitimate chance" at hearing the Gospel (at least in this life), whatever else one may think of it.

Soxfan59: I started a new thread in the "Great Debates" forum entitled "Now or In the Next Life?", should you wish to further discuss this issue. :)

[Monty]

Okay, a little addendum here for folks who've gotten lost in the scriptural references, etc.

First: Snarkberry and I have been discussing via this message board two particular aspects of Latter Day Saint (Mormon) scripture.

Second: he and I are obviously interpreting one particular aspect of said scripture differently.

Third: Soxfan says he's mislaid his copy of said scriptures (I'll post in this very message board a link to those scriptures online shortly) and also that he'd like to know exactly what the hey we're discussing (poetic license in the indrect quote, bear with me please).

Fourth: My personal interpretation is that those particular verses cited above from the D&C (Doctrine & Covenants) not only apply to members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints being cast out but also to any member of any group who says he's repenting of a particular offense against that group but proves that he's continuing to practice that same offense.

Hmmm...I guess it doesn't take a mental giant to discern that I refer to our pal, ARG220, in this case.

Yet, I pray that he'll at least open his heart to understand that different folks have different understandings.

Will this happen in my lifetime?

I doubt it, unless beating it into him is legitimate which I don't particularly buy.

[Doobieous]

Thank you Tom, you pretty much cleared things up for arg. I pretty much agree with all of what you have said. Too bad ARG doesn't see it. ARG: Live your life as you believe you should. Don't worry about others, they can take care of themselves. Oh and ARG, you need to get more reliable sources for your information. Defaming someones religion / denomination is not likely to get you friends.

[Monty]

Soxfan: as promised, here are two good links: http://hollender.org/scriptures/
http://www.hti.umich.edu/relig/mormon/

Doobious: It's painfully obvious that ARG considers anyone who's not a member of his faith group prima facie an unreliable source of any information and that only members of his faith group can be reliable sources.

Damn shame, ain't it?

[Byzantine]

Monty re: your suggestion to send ARG220 here to BYU -- please don't! Thanks!


------------------
The moon looks on many flowers, the flowers on but one moon.

[Doobieous]

Monty: Wow, you are absolutely right. I forgot that! We all know that ONLY the people in ARG's church are the experts on world religions and Catholocism. How could i have been so naive?! :)

[Monty]

Don't worry, Byzantine. It was just a joke. I doubt seriously ARG has the qualifications to enter a reputable institution, anyway.

[Kat]

I wouldn't say any post ARG makes, but more any post he makes dealing with religious beliefs in any way whatsoever. Of course, I haven't seen all that many of his posts that don't.
My advice to ARG would be to try posting only to non-religious topics for a while and see what happens. He may even find that he enjoys the boards when he doesn't worry about converting everyone.

[Byzantine]

Just wondering: The title of this thread is ARG220 -- let him live. So, what's the score? And if it comes up that he cannot live who's going to kill him? Don't all volunteer at once now, please! And in case you don't get it (ARG220 pay attention here) I'm JUST KIDDING! This thread is getting very long and serious and I just wanted to lighten it up with the thought of murder! Happy trails to you...

------------------
The moon looks on many flowers, the flowers on but one moon.

They want to kill me again. Dang! Hopefully I'll get to see "Cabin Boy" before I sleep with the fishes. I hear that film belongs in the AFI.

Adam

------------------
"Life is hard...but God is good"

[Kat]

He wants to see Cabin Boy???!!!

We should definitely put him out of his misery in that case.

------------------
"It's bacon!!"

[pricciar]

Its all well and good to knock Adam, but please lets keep Cabin Boy out of this.
Chris Elliot is a great man who doesn't need those kind of jibes.

By the way would you like to buy a monkey?


pat

[furt]

Adam, you may want to look for a website by a guy named Charles Moore under the heading of That They May Be One--it's on Geocities. He runs an email discussion board on ecumenical issues. It's quite interesting (though I don't subscribe anymore) and very informative; most of the participants are clergy; Catholic, Protestent and Orthodox. They are really good about answering qustions of the kind you are asking here (ie, what does the RCC believe about...). I couldn't find it just now, but if you look maybe you will (or something like it).

IMO, that's a much better place for these kinds of discussions: "in the family" so to speak. Unfortunately, I think the waters are poisoned for you here because of some of the things you've said before. I think nearly any post you make here is going to get a lot of hostility.

------------------
"It all started with marbles in school..."

[Byzantine]

Cabin Boy? Sounds like a "guy" flick, if you know what I mean. Hint, hint, wink, wink, nudge, nudge! My video book says, and I quote, "Pathetic, filthy-rich geek mistakes a grungy fishing trawler for a cruise ship in this lame fantasy-comedy version of Captains Courageous. Rated PG-13 for language 1994" and we all know that PG-13 stands for Perverts Get-off on thirteen year-old. Okay, let the flaming commence!


------------------
The moon looks on many flowers, the flowers on but one moon.

[pricciar]

My My yet again a close minded neanderthal decides to attack Cabin Boy without even seeing it.
Obviously that book was written by someone who decided to have an expensive 3 martini lunch instead of seeing Cabin Boy.
As Louis Malle said in his- top secret, heavily censored, very well hidden so don't even try to find- memoirs, "Cabin Boy is a film that I would compare to Au revoir les enfants- if the two films had anything in common."
If you can't believe Louis Malle's words, I don't know who you will believe.
Now, just because Nathanial Mayweather happened to go to the Fancy Lad finishing school, does not say anything about his manhood.

pat

[Byzantine]

Close minded neanderthal? Close? Like I'm close to you? Well, kiss a pig and make me smile sugar loaf! I'm close to you but if you meant closed minded, than we have another thing to discuss! I'm as open as the wide blue ocean! That's just what I got from my video guide! Tell me all about it hon, and hit the couch while you're at it! I'm pulling your leg, you know this don't you pricciar? XXOOXX!

------------------
The moon looks on many flowers, the flowers on but one moon.

[pricciar]

yeah, So was I. Most people won't like Cabin Boy, I figured I should put some kind of argument up for it. But, after the "close" minded screw up- I see my place is far away from the pit.
And I better say this before some film historian beats me up. I made up the Louis Malle quote, I just thought it would be really funny if he had said anything about Cabin Boy. He is an awesome director/writer, just not someone who I would imagine seeing Cabin Boy.

pat

"By the way would you like to buy a monkey?"

No. I dont want a monkey, I dont need no monkeys, WE DON' HAV' TO SHOW YOU NO STINKIN' MONKEYS....... sorry. Went all 'Sierra Madre' for a while. I'm back now.

We actually don't need a monkey, though. ARG says that there is no evolution & that if people evolved from monkeys there would be no monkeys. Since we all know that there is evolution, & since ARG did not evolve from a monkey---therefore ARG is the official Straight Dope Monkey-Boy & official missing link! Many happy returns of the day , ARG!