Baptisms at the Athletics Complex

[aubiefifty 16,791]

Just now, Proud Tiger said:

Yes I know some Muslims and I don't have any issue with them. BUT you miss my distinction. I said the terrorists are those who interpret the Quran to say kill infidels and think they are doing the right thing by doing so.

 

so why is it such a bad thing to believe some christians can do the same thing? you guys say true christians are not terrorists so that should hold with the muslim religion as well right? if not what is the difference?

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

8 minutes ago, DAG said:

You realize the man who started Christianity came from David's lineage. Like that had to occur for the prophecies to be set straight. By diminishing David's role in the bible, you pretty much-forgo Christianity as a whole, right?

Certainly I know that. But you are forgetting that David lived under the laws of the OLD Testament. Go read some of it and you will that supposedly God himself told Moses, Aaron, Joshua,and many others to go kill evil people. We were set free of all that by the grace of God thru Jesus. I'm no theologian so I won't down that path. It would turn into a whole separate thread which would never end.

[aujeff11 6,243]

5 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

you guys say true christians are not terrorists so that should hold with the muslim religion as well right?

This is correct. 

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

33 minutes ago, DAG said:

Well, all sin is not condoned by God, but that doesn't mean he wasn't a Man of God when he chose to do it. The comment above me says someone who is a follower of Christ wouldn't murder someone. David was by far a follower of God when he chose to do that.

Christ wasn't even born then. His coming started a  whole new era in our relationship to God the Father. It's called the NEW Testament.

 

[Tigerbelle 5,299]

20 hours ago, PigskinPat said:

I don’t think atheism means what you think it means.

Merriam-Webster defines it as:

1a : a lack of belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods 

b : a philosophical or religious position characterized by disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods 

2archaic  : godlessness especially in conduct : ungodliness, wickedness

 

 

I believe I mentioned the word "philosophy" and it does entail legal positions and has political implications...especially in the U.S.  It is not it's own religion. The definition does not say that it is a religion.

[DAG 33,982]

11 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

Certainly I know that. But you are forgetting that David lived under the laws of the OLD Testament. Go read some of it and you will that supposedly God himself told Moses, Aaron, Joshua,and many others to go kill evil people. We were set free of all that by the grace of God thru Jesus. I'm no theologian so I won't down that path. It would turn into a whole separate thread which would never end.

Okay you don’t have to be a theologian but IMO Christians try to separate the OT/NT which is very faulty . In fact jesus speaks directly against this type of talk in Matthew 5. Jesus was Jewish man who completely knew of, memorized and followed the Torah. He never says abandon the Torah in fact he comes to complete it. Now the law itself can’t save us only Jesus can do that, but Jesus calls the law Good and why wouldn’t he ? It came from his own father. David murdered someone which both Jesus and God condemned. The only difference is Jesus takes it a step further and attributes that even calling someone a fool not only gets you judgement but puts you at risk for hell fire, not just the action of murder. He puts this in the same context as murder. People forget that. So again, you really can’t forgo the Torah because the basis of the sermon of the mount is solidified by the Ten Commandments which was a huge part of the Torah and Jesus’s life. Of course there needs to be a distinction made between the conquest of Canaan and murdering someone for your own lustful ambition...

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

26 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

so why is it such a bad thing to believe some christians can do the same thing? you guys say true christians are not terrorists so that should hold with the muslim religion as well right? if not what is the difference?

I keep trying to explain. I never said all Muslims are terrorists. I said those who interpret the Quran to say kill the infidels are the terrorists. I don't know any Christians who interpret the Bible to say kill anyone.

[aujeff11 6,243]

1 minute ago, Tigerbelle said:

I believe I mentioned the word "philosophy" and it does entail legal positions and has political implications...especially in the U.S.  It is not it's own religion. The definition does not say that it is a religion.

I guess we need to define religion. Anything can be a religion. Football can be a religion. Simple Wikipedia description of religion:

There is no scholarly consensus over what precisely constitutes a religion.^[1][2] It may be defined as a cultural system of designated behaviors and practices, world views, texts, sanctified places, prophesies, ethics, or organizations, that relate humanity to the supernatural, transcendental, or spiritual.

Different religions may or may not contain various elements ranging from the divine,^[3] sacred things,^[4]faith,^[5] a supernatural being or supernatural beings^[6]or "some sort of ultimacy and transcendence that will provide norms and power for the rest of life".^[7]Religious practices may include rituals, sermons, commemoration or veneration (of deities), sacrifices, festivals, feasts, trances, initiations, funerary services, matrimonial services, meditation, prayer, music, art, dance, public service, or other aspects of human culture. Religions have sacred histories and narratives, which may be preserved in sacred scriptures, and symbols and holy places, that aim mostly to give a meaning to life. Religions may contain symbolic stories, which are sometimes said by followers to be true, that have the side purpose of explaining the origin of life, the universe, and other things. Traditionally, faith, in addition to reason, has been considered a source of religious beliefs.^[8]

There are an estimated 10,000 distinct religions worldwide,^[9] but about 84% of the world's population is affiliated with one of the five largest religions, namely Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism or forms of folk religion.^[10] The religiously unaffiliated demographic includes those who do not identify with any particular religion, atheists and agnostics. While the religiously unaffiliated have grown globally, many of the religiously unaffiliated still have various religious beliefs.^[11]

The study of religion encompasses a wide variety of academic disciplines, including theology, comparative religion and social scientific studies. Theories of religion offer various explanations for the origins and workings of religion.

[triangletiger 1,599]

21 minutes ago, DAG said:

Well, all sin is not condoned by God, but that doesn't mean he wasn't a Man of God when he chose to do it. The comment above me says someone who is a follower of Christ wouldn't murder someone. David was by far a follower of God when he chose to do that.

My point is that an adherent of a religion can act in accordance with the tenets of that religion or contrary to that religion. 

In the case of acts of terrorism, that is obviously contrary to the teachings and actions of Jesus. 

Is that the case with other religions?  Some could (and do) argue that Islamic extremists are acting consistently with the teaching of the Qu'ran.    Of course, others say that such acts are contrary to the teaching of Islam (which is a religion of peace).  However, there are certain surahs in the Qu'ran (e.g., 2:191-193, 9:5) that talk about killing infidels that could lead one to believe that Islamic terrorists are acting consistently with their religion.  Others might say those surahs should be interpreted symbolically or that that they're eschatological (talking about the end-times). 

[DAG 33,982]

7 minutes ago, triangletiger said:

My point is that an adherent of a religion can act in accordance with the tenets of that religion or contrary to that religion. 

In the case of acts of terrorism, that is obviously contrary to the teachings and actions of Jesus. 

Is that the case with other religions?  Some could (and do) argue that Islamic extremists are acting consistently with the teaching of the Qu'ran.    Of course, others say that such acts are contrary to the teaching of Islam (which is a religion of peace).  However, there are certain surahs in the Qu'ran (e.g., 2:191-193, 9:5) that talk about killing infidels that could lead one to believe that Islamic terrorists are acting consistently with their religion.  Others might say those surahs should be interpreted symbolically or that that they're eschatological (talking about the end-times). 

I am not even speaking about terrorism. Not in that discussion nor do I care about . I am solely speaking on what one poster said . He said that you can’t be a true Christian if you murder someone. That is a false statement which is why I referenced David. Now he wants to separate that from Christianity but I ask how? If you separate David from Christianity then you have to question the validity of Jesus himself as the messiah due to the fact that the messiah himself came from David’s lineage.

just because David murdered someone doesn’t mean he wasn’t a vessel of God even if it is contrary to God’s nature. God knows we are imperfect beings . It speaks volume to who God is that he is still merciful yet seeks justice. 

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

7 minutes ago, DAG said:

Okay you don’t have to be a theologian but IMO Christians try to separate the OT/NT which is very faulty . In fact jesus speaks directly against this type of talk in Matthew 5. Jesus was Jewish man who completely knew of, memorized and followed the Torah. He never says abandon the Torah in fact he comes to complete it. Now the law itself can’t save us only Jesus can do that, but Jesus calls the law Good and why wouldn’t he ? It came from his own father. David murdered someone which both Jesus and God condemned. The only difference is Jesus takes it a step further and attributes that even calling someone a fool not only gets you judgement but puts you at risk for hell fire, not just the action of murder. He puts this in the same context as murder. People forget that. So again, you really can’t forgo the Torah because the basis of the sermon of the mount is solidified by the Ten Commandments which was a huge part of the Torah and Jesus’s life. Of course there needs to be a distinction made between the conquest of Canaan and murdering someone for your own lustful ambition...

I don't think we are in much disagreement.Just my poor way of trying to express an opinion without an essay. I would ask though.......(1) in your last sentence did God tell David to commit adultery or kill anyone?  (2) Who told the Israelites to kill thousands of people and leave no survivors?

[aujeff11 6,243]

4 minutes ago, triangletiger said:

Some could (and do) argue that Islamic extremists are acting consistently with the teaching of the Qu'ran.   

Same for Christian extremists. Westboro Baptist Church, abortion clinic bombings, etc. Do you consider those actors true Christians or true believers? I don’t. But they still feel led by the same Bible that we use. 

[triangletiger 1,599]

1 minute ago, DAG said:

I am not even speaking about terrorism. Not in that discussion nor do I care about . I am solely speaking on what one poster said . He said that you can’t be a true Christian if you murder someone. That is a false statement which is why I referenced David. Now he wants to separate that from Christianity but I ask how? If you separate David from Christianity then you have to question the validity of Jesus himself as the messiah due to the fact that the messiah himself came from David’s lineage.

I wholeheartedly agree with you.  Christians are capable of sinning the same as anyone else (although there is an ages-long debate over whether a true Christian can freely reject God.  Arminians say yes; Calvinists say he/she was never a true believer).  The question, in my mind, is whether the person is acting in accordance with his belief system or contrary to it. 

[AU64 10,122]

4 hours ago, AU64 said:

I feel bad for belle....must have had some unpleasant experience in her past and seems to have a narrow and negative view of "organized religion" as opposed to unorganized religion which would probably describe my local church.

The old Methodist view of "think and let think" fits our small congregation and yet somehow we seem to get along and do some good things for the community too. 

As for the three young men who were Baptized, since they come from different cities, I expect they attend different churches....and I hope they will feel the desire to help serve their communities.    Like 'em or not, churches are a major positive force in helping deal with problems in our society. 

My apologies to Belle....should not have mentioned her by name.....not my intent to insult her or bully her.....

[triangletiger 1,599]

2 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

Same for Christian extremists. Westboro Baptist Church, abortion clinic bombings, etc. Do you consider those actors true Christians or true believers? I don’t. But they still feel led by the same Bible that we use. 

I believe they have misunderstood the Scriptures, and I certainly do not condone their actions as being consistent with Christianity.

[DAG 33,982]

1 minute ago, Proud Tiger said:

I don't think we are in much disagreement.Just my poor way of trying to express an opinion without an essay. I would ask though.......(1) in your last sentence did God tell David to commit adultery or kill anyone?  (2) Who told the Israelites to kill thousands of people and leave no survivors?

Absolutely not. But the fact that he murdered someone doesn’t make him less of God’s vessel. He absolutely murdered someone and had the consequences for it but God still utilized him as a vessel. It didn’t make him any less a man of God. Like I said , God calls David a man after his own heart which is why he promised him one of his descendants will sit on the throne forever , but that doesn’t mean he didn’t murder  somebody . He is human. He is fallible. It speaks much more highly of God’s nature that he still was willing to be merciful even after David killed someone from God’s own image.

[AU64 10,122]

2 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

Same for Christian extremists. Westboro Baptist Church, abortion clinic bombings, etc. Do you consider those actors true Christians or true believers? I don’t. But they still feel led by the same Bible that we use. 

Westside is a pretty small and narrow group and I'm guessing there are plenty who question whether they are actually following orthodox Christian teachings no matter what they call themselves.    Kind of like about any country that calls itself the Democratic Republic of Wherever is rarely a democracy or a republic. Folks can self identify as they choose these days. 

[aujeff11 6,243]

1 minute ago, triangletiger said:

I believe they have misunderstood the Scriptures.

Me too. And they’re a gross misrepresentation of my upbringing from a single Christian mother of three. In the same way, other religions are misrepresented when people paint religions with broad brushes. 

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

5 minutes ago, DAG said:

I am not even speaking about terrorism. Not in that discussion nor do I care about . I am solely speaking on what one poster said . He said that you can’t be a true Christian if you murder someone. That is a false statement which is why I referenced David. Now he wants to separate that from Christianity but I ask how? If you separate David from Christianity then you have to question the validity of Jesus himself as the messiah due to the fact that the messiah himself came from David’s lineage.

I guess we just differ and I think part of it is semantics. Yes David was a man of God in the OLD Testament. But he wasn't a Christian. Neither was Jesus or any of his followers Christian.  Christianity is a term born of the "church" as founded by Peter. But Jesus did give us a new testament, different from the one David lived under which offers us a way to receive God's grace rather than wrath.

[DAG 33,982]

3 minutes ago, triangletiger said:

I wholeheartedly agree with you.  Christians are capable of sinning the same as anyone else (although there is an ages-long debate over whether a true Christian can freely reject God.  Arminians say yes; Calvinists say he/she was never a true believer).  The question, in my mind, is whether the person is acting in accordance with his belief system or contrary to it. 

I would argue he is acting contrary which is why God set in stone an appropriate propritiation for us. As soon as Adam and Eve bit the apple it was in the works. That is why I love the good news but will never forgo the Old Testament. How can you fathom how great Jesus dying for us is without first understanding the precursor of why it is needed. We need Jesus because it is in our nature to do things contrary to the the things of our belief system. Paul explains this perfectly in Romans 7:14-25

[DAG 33,982]

1 minute ago, Proud Tiger said:

I guess we just differ and I think part of it is semantics. Yes David was a man of God in the OLD Testament. But he wasn't a Christian. Neither was Jesus or any of his followers Christian.  Christianity is a term born of the "church" as founded by Peter. But Jesus did give us a new testament, different from the one David lived under which offers us a way to receive God's grace rather than wrath.

Fair enough my friend

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

2 minutes ago, DAG said:

I would argue he is acting contrary which is why God set in stone an appropriate propritiation for us. As soon as Adam and Eve bit the apple it was in the works. That is why I love the good news but will never forgo the Old Testament. How can you fathom how great Jesus dying for us is without first understanding the precursor of why it is needed. We need Jesus because it is in our nature to do things contrary to the the things of our belief system. Paul explains this perfectly in Romans 7:14-25

You nailed it brother.

[DAG 33,982]

3 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

And your answer to my second question?

That is the distinction . God never told David to murder his general. He did order the conquest of Canaan. They are two different scenarios so I don’t get  exactly the point you are trying to make 

[selias 2,398]

46 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

I never heard of such and assume it was an isolated thing. But if so I agree it would be wrong and I would be the first parent at the school.

If it's good for the goose...

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2016/03/24/due-to-bible-distribution-a-colorado-elementary-school-will-now-give-away-satanic-coloring-books/

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/11/16/florida-school-board-says-satanic-activity-book-may-force-new-policy-on.html

https://jezebel.com/oklahoma-removes-ten-commandments-on-capitol-grounds-w-1735155450

Not all school related but....certainly not an isolated thing.

[Tigerbelle 5,299]

2 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

I guess we need to define religion. Anything can be a religion. Football can be a religion. Simple Wikipedia description of religion:

There is no scholarly consensus over what precisely constitutes a religion.^[1][2] It may be defined as a cultural system of designated behaviors and practices, world views, texts, sanctified places, prophesies, ethics, or organizations, that relate humanity to the supernatural, transcendental, or spiritual.

Different religions may or may not contain various elements ranging from the divine,^[3] sacred things,^[4]faith,^[5] a supernatural being or supernatural beings^[6]or "some sort of ultimacy and transcendence that will provide norms and power for the rest of life".^[7]Religious practices may include rituals, sermons, commemoration or veneration (of deities), sacrifices, festivals, feasts, trances, initiations, funerary services, matrimonial services, meditation, prayer, music, art, dance, public service, or other aspects of human culture. Religions have sacred histories and narratives, which may be preserved in sacred scriptures, and symbols and holy places, that aim mostly to give a meaning to life. Religions may contain symbolic stories, which are sometimes said by followers to be true, that have the side purpose of explaining the origin of life, the universe, and other things. Traditionally, faith, in addition to reason, has been considered a source of religious beliefs.^[8]

There are an estimated 10,000 distinct religions worldwide,^[9] but about 84% of the world's population is affiliated with one of the five largest religions, namely Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism or forms of folk religion.^[10] The religiously unaffiliated demographic includes those who do not identify with any particular religion, atheists and agnostics. While the religiously unaffiliated have grown globally, many of the religiously unaffiliated still have various religious beliefs.^[11]

The study of religion encompasses a wide variety of academic disciplines, including theology, comparative religion and social scientific studies. Theories of religion offer various explanations for the origins and workings of religion.

That's a very broad, all encompassing way of looking at it. Most people, if you ask them what "religion" they are will not answer sincerely with "football". It would be limited to something like Baptist, Catholic, Jewish....and I was answering within that context.  My cultural anthropology professor defined it as this:  that agnostics have religious beliefs but do not align with any particular religious doctrine. He also taught us that atheists are not religious at all and don't believe in any religious ideals. He would not classify atheism as a specific,defined religion. What it has become in this country in the last 40 years is a political and legal philosophy.