Thoughts on society.....

[Willow]

Show off...lol

I'm afraid to ask the next question. Hope you're Ok Moffo.
(batting 0-1)

 

This message has been deleted by the author.

 

[imported_E_A__]

Moose Molester,

I hesitate to go into a battle of wits with an unarmed man, but - EA, my post wouldn't have made sense to you since it wasn't full of swearing and name-calling insults.
Yep, unarmed as against your online paraplegia. That seems pretty fair. Keep typing with your tongue.

"Two bobs worth" - you're inflating the value of your posts. You should be glad Oneye is here because a) it gives you something to do, and b) he makes even you look smart by comparison

a) You flatter yourself again. Oneye may be stupid, a parrot and hardly worth the effort but his resistance makes yours look like you're slapping a steamroller with marshmallows.

 

[imported_E_A__]

Moffo.

Firstly EA, its pretty obvious that your name (everloving antichrist) reveals much of your attitude towards religion.

Actually, that's quite untrue. Can there be an Everloving Antichrist? I don't think so. It's a nic, there's no hidden meaning and I don't use it in religious communities.

Thats fine by me, as i said about 200 posts ago, im not here to preach, i have my views and you have yours.

I didn't accuse you of preaching.

People are free to believe and do as they want, doesnt concern me at all. Im just saying that the arguments are predictable, i mean, the old chestnuts such as there is no proof keep getting pulled out.

Well, that didn't come from me. If there's proof, I haven't been convinced. But I'm a little different in that I'm not looking to be convinced, I just don't care enough to bother.

All i can say is that religion involves faith. Faith does not involve seeing physical evidence.

No argument. I have no beef with any religion. I'd prefer not to have it shoved in my face and preaching irritates me, that's all.

Like believing your footy team will win the comp next year for instance.

I follow Wests.

 

[Kiwi]

its doesnt make sense but its true, the vatican doesnt acknowledge the mormons or 7th day adventurers


They also do not acknowledge the Church of England yet it is still considered "Christian"

 

[Cronulla_Mania]

Whatever floats your boat willow

"Are you sure that you're understanding the question?"

I mean, could u be more patronising if you tried?? Doubt it

But wait, we got another one boys and girls!

"As far as i know, the christian faith and the vatician dont acknowledge Mormons as part of the faith (but i might be wrong on that one)" How deep is that hole you're in Moffo...? lol


And allthat to have my previous comment confirmed in the next post by Ozbash. Top stuff that

Anywayssss, As was mentioned, the vatican doesnt acknowledge Mormons. They fall under the Christian banner, ok, well i guess that is up for debate. They might see themselves as representing the Christian religion, but obviously the vatican don't see things the same way. Perhaps it would be good to see what the vatican officially has to say on the issue. From where im sitting, we are all speculating at the moment.

I mean, saying 'they see themselves as Christians' is all fine and dandy, but there must be reasons why the vatican doesn't see it the same way. Send an email off to JP the Pope, express to the vatican

"Like believing your footy team will win the comp next year for instance.

I follow Wests.

"

lol. I couldnt be buggered getting rid of the blue font to make this last point

Moffo

 

This message has been deleted by the author.

 

[El Duque]

I wasn't aware that the Dope oops I mean Pope was the person who decided who were Christians and who weren't.

The Vatican speak for a minority.

 

[El Duque]

Moffo, I believe the vatican/pope is against the use offrangers and sex before marriage too

 

[Willow]

I'm not patronising you Moffo... I was genuinely of the opinion that you misunderstood the question. It happens to the best of us.

"Perhaps it would be good to see what the vatican officially has to say on the issue..."
And it does seem that you have still missed the point... sorry mate, believe me, I'm not having a go at you.

Read my lips:
1.) The Vatican represents the Roman Catholic Church.
2.) Catholicism is asection of christianity, a powerful organisation, but still they are just a section.... just like the Baptists or indeed the Mormons.
3.) It is immaterial what the Vatican think. They cannot dictate who is a christian and who is not a christian. The Pope can kick you out of the Catholic church but he cannot stop you being a christian.

Bloody heck mate... can't spell it out any better that.
I repeat what I said earlier...
Seems to me that the realisation that Catholicism is merely a branch of christianity comes as quite a shock to some people.

 

This message has been deleted by the author.

 

[imported_Mystery_Man]

Fair enough, Moffo. What you're basically saying is that it comes to down to faith. I guess, in the end, faith is the reason why Christians believe and Aetheists choose not to.
The original point of this thread was about environment, and I think that plays a major part in how many of us feel on these issues.

 

This message has been deleted by the author.

 

[CanadianSteve]

They also do not acknowledge the Church of England yet it is still considered "Christian"

Not true. The Vatican does acknowledge the Anglican church, and had dialogues with it in the 80s (I think) to bring the 2 churches closer together. I don't think much has come of it, though.

Having said that, I agree that the RC church has been presumptuous over the years in regarding itself as the one true church.

On Mormons: conservative/evangelical/fundamentalist Christians would say that what matters is what do you believe about Jesus himself. Mormons, I understand, don't believe Jesus was God Himself, come to earth. They have added another "sacred" book on top of the bible, where the bible itself says it is complete and is not to be added to or taken away from (see the last few verses of Revelation). I think if you looked at the Book of Mormon, which Joseph Smith claimed to have found on inscribed plates in the US in the 1800s, it reads like someone tried to make up a new bible, using English that tries to sound like the King James version of the Bible.

The Jehovah's Witnesses are similarly a sect (or cult) that came out of Christianity in the US in the 1800s, but don't believe in Jesus as God. Also, a key principle of Christianity, at least to Protestants is "by grace you have been saved, through faith: and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, that no one should boast..."(Ephesians 2:8,9). That is, you can't work your way to Heaven, it is a gift from God that comes from having faith in Him. Mormons, JW's and others try to work their way to heaven.

So Mormons and JW's and some other sects are not considered Christian because they differ on some fundamental things. Whereas different Protestant Christian denominations - Baptists, Methodists, Anglicans, etc. differ on forms of worship and finer points of Bible interpretation, but not on fundamental beliefs.

 

[Willow]

But the Mormons I know on the Sunshine Coast believe in Jesus Christ as the being the son of God. This being the fundamental concept of christanity.

My grandmother-in-law has pictures of Jesus in almost every room in her house... she makes cakes for the local school fetes and helps out people in her community by putting them in touch with good and honest tradesmen... she sounds like a good christian to me.

I'm being fair dinkum here.

I also understand that Mormons are derided by other christian faiths as not being of the 'true faith.'
Doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Willow]

Steve: as a follow up to my last post, I have a question...

You say, "Mormons and JW's and some other sects are not considered Christian because they differ on some fundamental things. "

Can you tell me who has decided this? That these 'sects' are 'not considered Christian'?

 

[Kiwi]

Canadian Steve

where the bible itself says it is complete and is not to be added to or taken away from

And we get back to the fact the bible was written by man, who is not perfect, so who is to say the bible is fact, correct, speaks the truth or is in fact complete?

 

[El Duque]

Here's a somewhat interesting read http://www.lds4u.com/d1/Christians.htm

 

[Willow]

After reading back... here's the way I see it:
<ul> [*]Some Roman Catholics think they are the superior Christians. [*]Some other branches of christianity, eg the Mormons are not a true faith.[/list] This leads me to think that one branch of christianity is dictating 'faith' and in turn are disregarding or criticising anything which which devitates from this version, or edict of 'faith'.
Who decides these things? By golly, it getting mighty hard to get result here folks. This question must be one hot potato.

 

[Kiwi]

After reading back... here's the way I see it:
<ul> [*]Some Roman Catholics think they are the superior Christians. [*]Some other branches of christianity, eg the Mormons are not a true faith.[/list] This leads me to think that one branch of christianity is dictating 'faith' and in turn are disregarding or criticising anything which which devitates from this version, or edict of 'faith'.
Who decides these things? By golly, it getting mighty hard to get result here folks. This question must be one hot potato. LOL They are trying to work out how to say it without using the words "because I said so" or "because the roman catholic church says so" I could take them a while