Finally, a religion/anti-religion thread.

[Narbus]

[Axtech]

[Narbus]

[Axtech]

[Narbus]

Hey, that wasn't you. Damn on me.


Like I said. I have a rather liberal definition of the word, and Cass did claim that I was just "afraid and bitter" which is much more traditional an attack, btw.

[Axtech]

Well, yeah. That's pretty attackish.

Meh. Let's get on with the debate. Sans-attack on all of our accounts.

[One-Eye]

[Narbus]

[Henrietta]

[Narbus]

So far as I know, the prophets in the Bible relied only on God's power, no occult tools were used.

Moses needed no stone to turn the rivers to blood, no divining rod to bring forth the locusts. God's will did these things.

Joshua didn't need folk magic to bring down the walls of Jericho, God did it for him.


Talismans of occult gods like Jupiter hardly count as God's will.


And yes, if you believe that Jesus is the one, and only, way to heaven, then you are a Christian. Otherwise, you're Catholic, or Mormon, or whatever else.

[Henrietta]

Narbus-I wouldn't say that if you don't believe Jesus is the only way to heaven then you automatically just fall into the Mormon or Catholic catergory. That's a little far fetched.

Mormons do believe that the only way to heaven is Jesus. We just have a few conditions. If you believe in him, then you are not just automatically "saved". What if you go and kill someone after that? Seems a little odd to have the commandments telling you what to do, and what not to do, and then you are just automatically forgiven if you believe in Christ. You have to believe him, and do his works to get to "heaven".

[Narbus]

[joe_canadian]

[Narbus]

[One-Eye]

The Christian church was started by the apostles after Jesus' death, and was not based on any books or on any scriptures. Only on his teachings. The books of the Bible were written at least 30 years after Jesus' death, and there still isn't consensus on what books are scripture and what books aren't. The Bible isn't some holy gift sent down by God all in one piece. It is a collection of works that is still being edited and argued over. Some people believe certain books belong in the Bible, others believe otherwise. None of this has anything to do with the meaning of being Christian.

Would you say, Narbus, that the Apostles weren't Christians because they didn't follow the teachings of this or that part of the Bible? There wasn't a Bible at the time. And there's no basis for any person to objectively categorize scriptures: these are right, these are wrong, if you believe these, you're a Christian, if you believe these you aren't. There's nothing behind that kind of argument but opinion.

Looking at things objectively, if a person believes in Jesus, then they are a Christian.

Furthermore, it's absurd to say Catholics aren't Christians, because in truth, the Apocrypha were in the Bible to begin with, and were taken out of Protestant Bibles in the 1500s. The Catholic church is the only one that descends straight from the Apostles, without breaking off. So to say that Catholics aren't really Christians because they believe in books that are different than the Protestants do is absurd. If you're going to make arguments like that, it's the <i>Catholics</i> who are the true Christians; they and their Bible were around first.

But of course, none of that has anything to do with anything. What matters is that what you're saying is something like this: We're trying to figure out whether ice cream is a dairy product, and your argument says, "Well, we all know that milk is a dairy product, and ice cream is different from milk in this, this, and this way, so obviously ice cream isn't a dairy product." All I'm saying is: Look at the definition of a dairy product. Compare ice cream to that definition, and you will have your answer.

Mormons believe in Christ. Ergo, they are <b>Christ</b>ians.

[Narbus]

The Apostles were Christians because they believed in Jesus and accepted him as their Savior.

The Mormon Church says that you have to do all this other stuff, too, which is not Biblical. They believe that Christ alone is not the way to Salvation.


PS: False analogy, on your part. I'm trying to work up an appropriate analogy. Gimme a minute or two.

[Narbus]

Ok. Here we go.
Christianity is the "dairy" family.
Mormons would be like fettucini alfredo. They USE dairy while making them, but they've just tacked on a lot of other stuff, so much that they can' t be called dairy anymore. They've gone beyond the boundaries of what we call dairy.

yeah. That works. Yeah.

[One-Eye]

Narbus. The definition of being a Christian doesn't <i>say</i> you have to <i>only</i> believe in Jesus and accept him as savior. It just says you have to believe in him. Mormons, Catholics, Protestants, Southern Baptists, Gnostics, Unitarians, Seventh-Day Adventists, Jesus Freaks, they <i>all</i> fit the definition. Your skirting of the issue is beginning to annoy me.

[Narbus]

And your refusal to read the verses from the Bible that I've posted is annoying me. So we're even.

[One-Eye]

I read them. It doesn't <i>matter</i>. We're going around in circles. If the definition of a Christian was "A person who believes that one is saved only through believing in Christ as their savior", you'd be right. But it doesn't. And so you're not. End of this argument.