Christian discussion: Everyone welcome, but please respect the intent of the thread

[mankytoes]

As someone whose quite anti religious I'm taking the "if you have nothing nice to say..." option, but the quaker church is great, contradicts almost all the awful things about religion that generally apply.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Hope you had a good day, Baelish. Not sure where you're going, but my brother graduated from U.of A.

[Littlefingers In The Air]

Thanks, Lily Valley. :) And FLoW, I'm at Stark State for the next year to improve my grades before I head back to Kent State. I have had a decent day, it's mostly been informative rather than instruction. Thank you for the well wishes.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Thanks, Lily Valley. :) And FLoW, I'm at Stark State for the next year to improve my grades before I head back to Kent State. I have had a decent day, it's mostly been informative rather than instruction. Thank you for the well wishes.

Is that off Frank Road? I'm a Jackson Twp native.

[Littlefingers In The Air]

Well, the main campus is on Frank Road. I'm going to one of the satellite campuses for now. I thought of going to U of A but the graduation rate is...abysmal.

[Rorshach]

Eponine,

Not sure, "Eastern Orthodox" churches all share the same theology and are in communion with each other. I can take communion at any "Eastern Orthodox" chruch be it Russian, Greek, Bulgarian, Antiochian, Ukranian, Serbian... etc regardless of the political. Structure of that church. If the Ethopian Orthodox are in communion with us the same is true, but, I believe they are Nestorians and as such out of communion.

Just checked, they split away from the (then) Unified (Orthodox and Roman Catholic) Church after the 451 Council of Chalcidone over a disagreement about the dual nature of Christ wholely human and wholely God in one body. They said Christ had to be a blend of the two aspects that were then unified, not divided.

They have been accepted into some Orthodox world wide thingy later (1991, if memory serves). I'm not to strong on the Orthodox denominations, but I'm somewhat familiar with the EOC, having lived in Ethiopia for six years (and even meeting the former patriarch, Abuna Paulos. Yay!). The EOC is also more old-testament oriented than most Orthodox churches, owing to an old Ethiopian legend saying that the Queen of Sheeba was Ethiopian, and that she got a child with king Solomon. The son, Menelik I, returned to Israel and brought the Ark of the Covenant to Ethiopia. It is found (but guarded, and never seen) in Axum, north in Ethiopia.

ETA: Me. I've grown up in a conservative Lutheran enviroment in Norway, and my parents were also in Ethiopia for the Norwegian Lutheran Mission (NLM). Very much a layman organization, I was more or less a part of that organization until I started studying. '

The biggest problem with the NLM to my mind is that it's really insular (correct word?); too closed. Many members live their life completely within the organization, having their friends there, work, service etc. Funnily, I know many former missionary children who have left the NLM, feeling that they have seen a bigger world. Of these, none that I know of regard themselves as not Christian, they have just chosen more "open" churches.

Myself included. I'm a member of the Norwegian Lutheran Church (formerly the national church), and I'm finding myself content there. I am not really a very emotional or especially devout Christian, but being a believer is an important part of my identity.

[Galactus]

Also, the EOC are monophysites (like the copts) not nestorians. (opposite thing, basically)

[Järv]

Okay, I'll also share my "inner position": I am the obscure case of a religious person who dislikes almost every other religious person he meets.

I was baptized and raised as a Roman Catholic, because, well, that happens to you more or less automatically in Bavaria, like drinking lots of beer. But nobody in my family was in any way interested in religious topics. They all were pro-forma catholics. You were catholic because everybody was catholic.

I attended mass maybe about once a year, because I was forced to do so, for example by my school teachers. I also enjoyed (*irony*) compulsory catholic instruction in school, twice a week, until I was 15. I cannot remember to have met one single person involved with the catholic church in those years who made a positive impression on me.

When I was 15 I turned into an ardent atheist, and left the church (an act that was not easy because, apparently, nobody in my Bavarian village in the 1980ies, including the bureaucrats, had ever heard about this little sentence in our constitution guaranteeing religious freedom to all people who are 14 years or older…).

I retrospect, I think I was clinically depressive until about my 28^th year, with ups and downs of course, but never really free of depression. The love of women, professional success, and psychotherapy helped to improve my psychological condition.

And, interestingly, with improving mood, I slowly developed a conviction that there exists a higher being, not just some abstract “universal principle”, a personal higher being, incomprehensibly great, that I am not able to describe in any more detail, but that somehow, in a few precious moments, gave me something like a nod, or a smile, and the feeling was stunningly, unbelievably warm and caring…

Now I try to relate to this being almost every day, by meditating/praying.

But nevertheless, I usually dislike other religious persons. I think what I dislike most is that they all claim to know so much about this higher being. How can you dare to say that you know anything about him/her/it? Isn’t that the purest form of blasphemy?

You dare to say you know because some long-dead prophets told you that they had close contact to him/her/it and that he/she/it spoke to them? But is this the truth? People lie. People like to be important and being a prophet makes you very important. And even if it’s the truth, and they had contact with this higher being, how to translate this experience? Because, at least according the all mystics I have read, the presence of god is such a bone-shattering experience that it would be surprising if it was possible to translate his/her “words” into comprehensible Aramaic or Arabic…

So, in essence, I need to find some kind of “Church without scripture”. But where to find that? :idea:

Btw, great thread Mister OJ, thanks for starting it!

[Stubby]

Thanks, Lily Valley. :) And FLoW, I'm at Stark State for the next year to improve my grades before I head back to Kent State. I have had a decent day, it's mostly been informative rather than instruction. Thank you for the well wishes.

Please tell me the Stark State athletic mascot is a wolf?

[Littlefingers In The Air]

Please tell me the Stark State athletic mascot is a wolf?

I'd be lying to you. We're only lowly Spartans. I shall petition to be the Stark State Wolves

[MisterOJ]

Stark State Direwolves would be epic.

[Littlefingers In The Air]

Stark State Direwolves would be epic.

I think Wolves would be good enough. We could chant "A time for wolves!"

[Waldo Frey]

How can you dare to say that you know anything about him/her/it? Isn’t that the purest form of blasphemy?

I like to share my own take on "knowing" God. Jesus said, "And this is life eternal, that they might know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. " (John 17:3) We know about God a lot, thru the Bible. But what Jesus said here about knowing God the Father, is not merely the head knowledge, but a sense of trust in Him in our daily life.

[Littlefingers In The Air]

Really enjoying my General Psychology professor.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

But nevertheless, I usually dislike other religious persons. I think what I dislike most is that they all claim to know so much about this higher being. How can you dare to say that you know anything about him/her/it? Isn’t that the purest form of blasphemy?

Some of that may just be the struggle for some people to try to put into words something that is so difficult to do.

One thing that is so interesting in this thread is that despite the common claim that religion is dogmatic and exclusionary, this thread is full of people very appreciative of hearing other people tell of their religious experiences and understanding. Even though we're all generally describing different experiences and sometimes different understandings. And I think that's because of a mutual recognition that God speaks to each of us differently.

I think that understanding embodies what is best in Christianity and religion in general --the humility of understanding that we're not all perfect or omniscient.

[awesome possum]

I'm a very anti-religion, pro-spirituality person. Growing up, my parents would send my siblings and I to whatever church they could find, didn't matter what denomination it was. They preferred 1) one that started early 2) one that went well past noon and 3) one that preferably had day-long activities that commenced with night church.

Around fifth grade is when they found their ideal mix: a baptist church that started at 8 am (bus would pick us up about 7) and go until between 2 and 4 pm. During the summer they would often have "special events" that would last from when the sermon got out until the evening sermon began so that we would be out of the house from 7 am until 9 or 10 pm. When the church had no special events they would ship us off to a nearby Pentecostal church that had night services from 6 until 9. We'd been going to the Baptist church off and on since I was seven with occasional periods of absence when we moved somewhere that wasn't on their bus route.

In between those two we went to all sorts of different churches, except Catholic. Catholics got things done and over with too quickly for my parents liking, so it was Episcopalian, Methodist, Presbyterian, you name it and we likely spent a Sunday there testing the waters. But as I said, the formula that stuck was Baptist in the morning and Baptist/Pentecostal until I became old enough to stand up for myself and say, "No, I'm done with that crap."

And in my eyes it was mostly crap. I enjoyed the stories in the Bible, which I would often read while the sermons droned on and one. I just couldn't stand the people and the hypocrisy, especially the Baptists. I have nothing but loathing for the Baptist denomination. It's full of horrible, horrible people. Now, I'm not saying everyone who is a Baptist is horrible, but my experience was not good.

There was the bribing of kids to go to church by offering candy or prizes, etc., bribes that would usually disappear when the time came or would go to one of the megachurch pastor's "favorites" which as I would discover years later was codeword for "kids he was molesting." The "quiet contests" during the sermons which usually involved a bribe of a king sized candy bar. I never won that thing despite the fact that I would sit quietly and read the Bible during the entire thing. In fact, I would be punished for not paying attention. I actually just googled the name of the church and turns out that its been in the news for years as being physically abusive towards students and attendees. I can attest to that as I recall being forced to hold a bible in each outstretched hand in "timeout" for my transgressions. If I couldn't hold those bibles up the entire time, it meant being swatted with a wooden paddle.

I didn't mind the Pentecostal church so much. The people there were incredibly kind and taught me about spirituality rather than rigid discipline.

I only go to church now when I'm visiting my father-in-law, who is a Church of Christ minister in Kentucky. I go out of respect for him. I respect his spirituality just as I respect all spirituality. But I have no respect for religion.

[Morienthar]

I have a few questions...Recently a Catholic friend told me her church told them not to read or watch Da Vinci Code,Is something like this common or does it depend on the priest??

Would Christians be offended by a completely human Jesus? i.e if he did marry and have kids ans such...

[MisterOJ]

I have a few questions...Recently a Catholic friend told me her church told them not to read or watch Da Vinci Code,Is something like this common or does it depend on the priest??

Not Catholic, but I suspect it would depend on the priest. I don't think there was any edict that came down from the highest echelon of the church to tell congregants not to read that book.

Would Christians be offended by a completely human Jesus? i.e if he did marry and have kids ans such...

Offended is a pretty loaded word. By "completely human" do you mean that he was not really the Son of God, made flesh? I don't believe that. If someone were to make the argument that there was nothing divine about Jesus, I would disagree. But I wouldn't be offended. Unless the person making the argument did it with the intent to be offensive - but then I would just be put off by the tone, not the argument itself.

Would it bother me if it was discovered and proven that Jesus was married and fathered children? I don't think so. I would find that very interesting and I would wonder why such was completely left out of the Gospel, but I don't think it would shake my faith or anything.

[Rorshach]

I have a few questions...Recently a Catholic friend told me her church told them not to read or watch Da Vinci Code,Is something like this common or does it depend on the priest??

Would Christians be offended by a completely human Jesus? i.e if he did marry and have kids ans such...

Not being Catholic, I couldn't claim to know the truth here. However, I would think that it's a single priest making a statement. I can't fathom his reasons, as even if the book is far from factual (it is), telling people to keep away isn't really the best way to .. keep them away (see: Snakes and apples..).

A completely human Jesus is what was Arius' theology back in the pre-Nicean days (300 AD). It was part of the reason for the Council of Nicea, and was rejected. Generally, most churces believe that Jesus was both 100% man and 100% God.

[Morienthar]

Not Catholic, but I suspect it would depend on the priest. I don't think there was any edict that came down from the highest echelon of the church to tell congregants not to read that book.

Good to hear....It was a good book,btw She read it anyway.

Offended is a pretty loaded word. By "completely human" do you mean that he was not really the Son of God, made flesh? I don't believe that. If someone were to make the argument that there was nothing divine about Jesus, I would disagree. But I wouldn't be offended. Unless the person making the argument did it with the intent to be offensive - but then I would just be put off by the tone, not the argument itself.

Would it bother me if it was discovered and proven that Jesus was married and fathered children? I don't think so. I would find that very interesting and I would wonder why such was completely left out of the Gospel, but I don't think it would shake my faith or anything.

Seems reasonable....