Polycarp** is a Christian himself, so he already knows this. The thing that is making him despair is how his fellow beleivers are treating him. It’s a sad commentary that the godless, hellbound heathens like me are kinder to him than the people that supposedly call him “brother.”
Polycarp -some stuff for you. Trinity-I cant find that word anywhere in the bible. Even Polycarp (the origional, old school, Polycarp, not your username) was in possession of Ignatius’ writings, and endorsed his theology of Oneness. It is to be expected, therefore, that Polycarp’s theology would resemble that of Ignatius. The only statement Polycarp made that would lend itself to the trinitarianism states, "The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ Himself, who is the Son of God, and our everlasting High Priest, build you up in faith and truth."6 Some see in this statement an incipient trinitarianism, but it does not advocate modern trinitarianism. Polycarp merely asserted that which the Scriptures assert, i.e. a distinction between the Father and Son. His statement was quite Scriptural, and did not reflect later theological developments. This site gives a good run-down on Trinitarian development. apostolic.net - -Great wealth of knowledge
Polycarp please look to my OP for further reference. Thank you and God bless. 
[offsubject, sort of]
gobear, can you ever let the man answer for himself. lol i would find it annoying if someone did that to me all the time.
[/offsubject, sort of]
Polycarp, I don’t recall that you and I have ever interacted directly, but I just had to jump in here. Forgive me if this is out of line.
I’m much like andros, in that I describe myself as agnostic. I probably even lean more to the atheist side these days. But my thinking is that if an entity like the Christian god does exist, how could concepts such as love, compassion, and understanding not be the most important things? Wouldn’t the concepts of “Love thy neighbor” and “Do unto others” be the principal guiding lessons?
So I don’t share your beliefs, but you are, in my mind at least, a shining example of a decent human being, and the very best of what a Christian should be.
So don’t let them get you down. You are, in point of fact, one class act.
Me, too, brother, and like you, I’m working on it. Including, it would seem, yourself. I offer you my apologies and ask your forgiveness.
Likewise. I’ve said just what you say before, in particular to gobear when he felt like Christians generally were doing a number on him – which has a lot to do, IMHO, with why he spoke up in my defense.
I’d really like your feedback on my “What Part of No” thread, friend. Your perspective is nonjudgmental but significantly more conservative than my own, and you may be able to bridge a gap that I’m having a lot of problems with.
Amen to that. Except that it’s a whole cluster of lifestyles focused on the idea that whatever our social state, walk in life, etc., we’re to follow Jesus as Lord of our lives. I’ve always liked that passage – that transformation cannot be described adequately to someone who has not experienced it. (Cf. Louis Armstrong on jazz! ;))
masonite:
It’s interesting that you both agree you have vastly differing conceptions of God, and if you are right, Polycarp and all the other “liberals” (using that term very broadly) are let out of salvation. For the purposes of this discussion, that would include me too.
For what it’s worth I’m working in the framework of Christianity and the words of Jesus to point out the hypocrisy Polycarp trying to play both sides of the fence. That of holding to the bible or more narrowly the teachings of Christ while maintaining a morality that our society would not consider ghastly at worst or foolish at best. If I am right (outside of this argument) then it’s just lights out when we die as I don’t believe in heaven, hell or even god for that matter.
Allow me to opine that both “sides” ought to see this schism as painful and shameful. If anybody here is “going to hell”, the angels are weeping about it, not celebrating.
I agree with you and say from any angle that you look at it, it’s a screwed up religion. It’s what the bible says and what Jesus says. Hence, no small part of the reason why I don’t believe in any of it. As such I can see why Polycarp would try to rewrite it in the image of a morality which current society deems as better. Still I think it would be far more reasonable for him to just discard it all for the superstition, for which in all probability it is.
Nope, badchad, I’m not looking to “shave off the bad parts” but, having experienced the reality of Jesus’ presence in my life (or at least what I perceived as that – whether that was the reality of it is stuff for quite a different debate!), I’m interested in doing what He says is the right thing to do.
And when I read what the Gospels report are His teachings, I see a quite different calling, a very different commanded behavior structure, than what evangelical Christianity teaches. I’m dealing with that in the Judge Not/What Part of No thread.
Beyond which, I accept the historical/scientific method of processing facts about the world. And they lead me to the conclusion that the Bible, important though it is for knowing God, is not a manual dictated by God to guide every aspect of one’s life, but a collection of texts accruing over centuries, written and rewritten to suit the personal prejudices of the authors. I think you can see a bottom line in it despite that, however – and tried to convey that idea to you before. But I do not see my beliefs as Bible-based except in the sense that what Jesus commands is reported in the Bible, along with the liturgical processes to be carried out in the Jerusalem Temple, regulations for the Israelite tribes, Paul’s opinions as requested by churches he had founded, a poem in honor of a Jewish wedding, a poem by a cynical Wisdom scholar who has found all of life to be “all lies and jest.” And so I try to live out what I believe my Lord has commanded me to live, and study the rest as an interesting subject.
Polycarp
Those questions you ask are based on a literalist reading of Scripture. And you know the answers that a literalist would give.
I told you you’d say that.
Let me emulate my Lord, and ask you who said those things, and if the person or persons who did have moral authority over you? Then the answers to the questions you asked me will be based on the answer to the question I just asked you.
Just answer them please. I was asking your opinion which should have nothing to do with the source of where I got them. But if it matters most of my questions were inspired by the sermon on the mount. To make responding easier, here they are again:
Do you think it would be wrong for a woman to divorce a mentally and physically abusive husband assuming no infidelity?
Do you think it is wrong if a man were to marry the above mentioned divorced woman and provide a good safe home for her and her children in a healthy relationship?
Do you think prayer in church is wrong?
Do you think it is wrong to give alms in church?
Do you think it is wrong whistle at a hot babe?
Do you think it is wrong for people to save a portion of their income for emergencies or for retirement?
Do you think one should hate/abandon their family to follow Jesus.
Do you think slaves should obey their masters?
Do you really think people should burn in hell for honest disbelief (and please don’t give me that cop out about heaven being real but hell another allegory, unless you have something better than wishful thinking to back it up).
*badchad, I see your point now, and I regret presuming you were playing a different game on me. Yes, I’m very well aware of my own shortcomings, and trying my best to do what He would have me do. In our previous conversations, I never intended to say anything different – though I can see where you’d derive from them a quite different view. And I’m aware of the gamble I’m taking in presuming that Jesus’s message was what I see it as being. It’s one I choose to take.
But I find the accusations of hypocrisy and lukewarm-ism in some recent posts to be unfounded. Can we target where people see me as such, and perhaps discuss that?*
I think I already targeted it. First, the discrepancy Nomadic_one found, when he/she posted:
*Polycarp im a bit confused, today you stated that you stated (in the homosexuality and the bible thread the question: Do you (one word can’t really encompass the whole question) [believe, trust, accept, follow] the whole bible.
quote:
-Polycarp Oh, absolutely.
and today you say
[quote]
Polycarp -This may sound like semantic nitpickery, but it is not – the key point is in following Christ, not in following the Bible. And that makes all the difference.
[quote]
you said you follow the bible in another post yet here you say to not follow it. can you please elaberate on your standpoint?*
It’s a contradiction. You can’t say you “absolutely” “follow” the bible and then later say you should not “follow” the bible when it says something you don’t like. Then you pull out this “I follow Jesus BS but you don’t. Then you pull out this I try but I fall short BS, but you don’t even do that. Like I said in my first post on this thread, you follow the parts you want to follow and rationalize away the rest. Honestly answer my above questions and I think it will be clear. Yes or no will be fine.
Judging by this thread, there are obviously two kinds of Christians – those that are right, and those that are deluded and hellbound. [sub](Insert tongue-in-cheek smilie here)[/sub] Unfortunately for us spectators, both sides are playing “skins”.
Thanks, Nomadic_One.
Polycarp says:
This is the kind of thing I don’t understand. A collection of texts written and rewritten to suit the personal prejudices of the authors? Like God isn’t able to see that we have His true word? After all He did say He’d preserve His word. Oh, but wait that’s not acceptable because that’s in the Bible. If that’s what you think, why have anything to do with it? If it’s not truly God’s word, then it’s a lie and why are you wasting your time on a lie? All I can say, Poly, is that millions of Christians around the world disagree with you, including me. With this kind of thinking, it’s open for you to come up with any kind of doctrine or belief you want. It doesn’t matter if it contradicts the Bible because, after all, it’s only a collection of texts written and rewritten over the centuries to suit the prejudices of the authors. You can pick and choose what you like and discard the rest or you can make it say whatever you want it to. I’m afraid I simply can’t understand.
It’s either God’s word or it isn’t. Which is it? I think I’m probably wasting my breath. 
And millions of Christians disagree with you, His. Fortunately, God didn’t put it up to majority vote.
So if you ask me to choose between following Jesus and following the Bible, I’d have to choose Him. After all, He’s the one who loved me enough to die for me, and save me from my sins.
BTW, have you noticed the “Mr. Ed is a zebra” thread? (Not a hijack; I have a point.) Snopes.com does a valuable service in looking into all the stories that circulate, particularly on the Internet, and determining which are true and which false. But they played a little game – they have one small area where they report false stories, with a disclaimer not to believe anything in that one small area. But people, figuring “Snopes is true,” take the “Mr. Ed was a zebra” report seriously.
That’s how I feel about the Bible. It contains the word of God. He inspired its writers – but not as a boss dictating a letter to his secretary, more like a Christian singer/songwriter’s line: “Knowing Jesus inspired me to write this song” only more so.
Don’t put your trust in the Bible. Put it in the God of whom the Bible speaks. And most importantly, put it in Jesus Christ, who was God walking the earth as man, and whose words, whatever else one finds in that volume, can be trusted.
Okay, if you insist, here are my answers, with commentary.
No, I do not. I believe that Jesus was condemning men of his time who, like those of this time, felt that it was their right to have a woman who sparked their libido, not one with whom they had exchanged supposedly lifelong commitments. To do otherwise than this would be to condemn His4Eever as an unrepentant adulteress, based on her own account (as I think you realize quite well, from the way the question is phrased), and this I refuse to do.
For the same reasons, absolutely not.
No, of course not. We’re commanded to come together for fellowship, the breaking of bread, and prayers. What Jesus condemned was an arrogant public piety – a “look how pious I am, I’m praying here in public” which does not equate to a gathering of believers.
One gives help wherever help is needed, to the extent one can. This can include through the church, which usually has a mechanism for dispensing such gifts where and to whom they are needed.
For me, yes. For somebody else, it depends on their motivation, and I refuse to be a judge of that. Men are so created as to (usually) desire women, and the reverse. “Whistling at a hot babe” is a rather uncouth way of expressing that interest, which may mean “I like your looks, want to get to know you better, and don’t rule out marriage down the road” or “I think you’re hot, and want to drag you behind the nearest bush and shag you.”
Nope. This is being good stewards of the resources entrusted to one. I know it goes against “lay not up treasures on earth” but it means that you will be able to provide for yourself and not depend on the generosity of others. (Been tough for me to do that, though.)
Hate, no. This is a Semitic turn of phrase, not to be taken literally as “You must love one and hate the other” but rather “You must put one as very much ahead of the other,” something like the English “it’s raining” (What is the “it” which is raining? The same “it” which is hot/cold/sunny/dark?) or the Spanish hace frio – What is it which is making cold? How does it make cold? Could it make something else? As for abandoning, only in extreme cases would this be justified. But that was the case in Jesus’s day too. What He’s saying is, set Him first in your life, and if you have to turn away from something else, even something important, to keep following Him, do so.
Paul was a well-meaning idjit. He was not going to be faced with advocating a slave rebellion. No, I don’t think there should be slavery (despite an ironic post in response to a remark over on Pizza Parlor) and therefore there should be no slaves or masters to do any of the obeying or commanding.
Nope. And I don’t think God does any such thing.
And I realize that these are carefully culled to demonstrate that I don’t take the Bible literally. Which I would have said if you’d asked that directly.
Happy now?
His4ever:
If that’s what you think, why have anything to do with it? If it’s not truly God’s word, then it’s a lie and why are you wasting your time on a lie? All I can say, Poly, is that millions of Christians around the world disagree with you, including me. With this kind of thinking, it’s open for you to come up with any kind of doctrine or belief you want. It doesn’t matter if it contradicts the Bible because, after all, it’s only a collection of texts written and rewritten over the centuries to suit the prejudices of the authors. You can pick and choose what you like and discard the rest or you can make it say whatever you want it to. I’m afraid I simply can’t understand.
It’s either God’s word or it isn’t. Which is it? I think I’m probably wasting my breath.
Isn’t it interesting how are perspectives are so different but our arguments so similar.
“When you’ve got both sides of a dispute madder at you than at each other, you know you’re doing something right!” – An ex-boss trained as a professional mediator
His, in the other thread I pointed out God’s word in I Timothy 2:11-13. You’re a women and therefore subject to men in all things. You have no business talking about the Gospel, because God said you should be making babies and tending to housework.
You’re just a woman and God says your opinion on theology is worthless.
Repent!
The Christians I fellowship with would consider that first statement an amazing oddity coming from a Christian. Don’t trust the Bible? You keep amazing me, Poly. We put our trust in God AND in His word. I wouldn’t know about God and Christ if not for His word. We don’t believe it just “contains” His word, we believe it is His word. As usual, we’ll agree to disagree. Don’t think that’s going to change.
Are you going to respond to God’s word about women teaching on spirtual matters? Your posts on this subject contradict the very clear teaching of I Timothy. How do you reconcile that with your faith in Biblical literalism?
Evidently I haven’t been paying ENOUGH attention. I completely misread your intent in this thread. Thanks for the clarification.
http://www.speakingastheoraclesofgod.com/anwsers/may_women_speak.htm
No, wasn’t really planning on responding. And there are no babies, either. I’m past that stage. See above link. Perceive it however you wish. See Galatians 3:27-28
Polycarp:
And I realize that these are carefully culled to demonstrate that I don’t take the Bible literally. Which I would have said if you’d asked that directly.
Here is what is hypocritical. You say you don’t follow the bible but follow the teachings of Jesus. What you just showed is that you don’t follow the teachings of Jesus as all of the above questions (with the exception of slavery, an error on my part) are derived from the teachings of Jesus via the gospel. And then you post rubbish like this:
*Don’t put your trust in the Bible. Put it in the God of whom the Bible speaks. And most importantly, put it in Jesus Christ, who was God walking the earth as man, and whose words, whatever else one finds in that volume, can be trusted.
And when I read what the Gospels report are His teachings, I see a quite different calling, a very different commanded behavior structure, than what evangelical Christianity teaches.*
Get it now?
Happy now?
More so. I’ll give you some credit. I thought you were going to try to double talk your way out of all of them, but at least on divorce and saving for the future it didn’t seem that hard for you to give Jesus the bird.