Posted on 01/11/2005 6:18:33 PM PST by malakhi
| Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. |
After a nine month hiatus, The Neverending Story, the granddaddy of daily threads, has returned to Free Republic. Originally begun on March 24, 2001, as a religious discussion thread, the NES evolved over time into a daily thread spanning a wide variety of topics. The new and improved Neverending Story will feature conversation on religion, politics, culture, current events, business, sports, family, hobbies, general fellowship and more. We welcome you to hang your hat in our little corner of FR. We ask you to abide by the FR posting rules and, even in the midst of serious debate, to keep the discussion friendly and respectful. Those who wish to "duke it out" are asked to take it over to the Smoky Backroom. I placed this thread in "General/Chat" for a reason, so play nice and have fun! :o)
http://www.onr.com/user/bejo/index.htm
Thanks. I have bookmarked the site. From what I see it is very interesting but lousy music. :-) (I am thankful for the mute button).
By what authority do you define a Christian?
Oh no...lousy music? I had no idea since the audio on my computer no longer works. I guess it's a good thing in this case.
I would agree he certainly is not "orthodox" Christian. However, he does follow the teaching of the man we call Jesus Christ...instead of the doctrines of the Constantinian (or Nicene) Christian Church.
Except for this teaching, of course:
Matt 18:17And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.
You can't claim to follow Jesus and ignore Him when He says obey the Church. At most, you can follow the teachings of Jesus that you personally approve of. But, then again, that's pretty much the point of the modern individualist believer.
SD
Perhaps not, but they are a necessary testament to the Trinity nonetheless.
SD
If Abraham made the mistake of referring to Sarah as "that 800 year old woman", that might have explained the delay in their having a child. ;o)
Buncha filthy heretics. Stick with the "approved" list of "church fathers". ;o)
You make a false analogy (and a false example). A formal declaration of the Trinity (a word you don't have to accept any more than "transubstantiation" or "purgatory") was not the beginning of a new belief/doctrine.
If (prior to the use of the word "trinity") there was a clergyman (certainly NOT a majority) who did not believe simultaneously in "one God" AND "Jesus is God".... then no... he was not a Christian.
That's simply untrue. Unless you're talking about early in His ministry when they did not understand who He was. You certainly cannot claim that the Apostles did not believe that Jesus was God after the Resurrection.
John answered, "Master, we saw a man casting out demons in your name, and we forbade him, because he does not follow with us."
But Jesus said to him, "Do not forbid him; for he that is not against you is for you." (Luke 9:49-50)
Buncha filthy heretics. Stick with the "approved" list of "church fathers". ;o)
Actually, even God doesn't pull ex post facto laws on us.
SD
Actually, this is not quite the case. One could honestly (but in error) be of a different opinion prior to the dogma being defined.
SD
By what authority do YOU define the color "purple"?
If a dozen people moan and complain that you're hurting their feeling by telling them that their green grass is NOT, in fact, "purple"... can they complain that you have no authority to do so?
If they are really genuine in their beliefs... must you accept their definition?
A Christian is a follower of the Lord Jesus Christ (as it was in acts... the first time the word was used). IF the "Christ" you follow is a turnip truck, you may CALL yourself "Christian", but it doesn't make it so. If He ISN'T God... He might as well be a turnip truck.
John answered, "Master, we saw a man casting out demons in your name, and we forbade him, because he does not follow with us."
But Jesus said to him, "Do not forbid him; for he that is not against you is for you." (Luke 9:49-50)
I'm not sure what you think this means.
SD
Read it again... there was no "Dogma" being "defined" that Christ was God. That "doctrine" predates any of the NT being written down or any church council being called. The Church bears witness to the truth... She does not "create" the Truth. You don't have to have a fully-formed understanding of "the Trinity" if it hasn't been given a name.... but that's an entirely different thing. Apart from an understanding of Jesus as God... there IS no "Christianity".
Of course there was. That's what the Council of Niceae was all about.
"doctrine" predates any of the NT being written down or any church council being called. The Church bears witness to the truth... She does not "create" the Truth.
No argument from me. Of course Jesus being God predates existence and of course the Church doesn't create Truth. She does, however, define and promulgate the Truth. Prior to a definitive, binding definition an individual is free to have any number of opinions on a subject. After the Church defines an issue, one must given assent to the teaching.
Example: prior to 1950, one could either believe in Mary's Assumption or not. It was not a binding dogma. One did not need to assent to it in order to be considered a member of the Church.
After 1950, if one did not accept the Assumption, he placed himself outside of the Church.
SD
It's a compelling "warm fuzzy" interpretation. I'd LIKE for it to be true. But you can't "follow the teachings" of Jesus apart from who He is.
Not at all. The disagreement was over the use of the word "homoousious" (since it was not used in Scripture) but already agreed with the concept in conveyed... and the Arian heresy. There is no question that they already believed the concepts that became part of the Nicene creed.
Nicea was NOT where we first find that Christ is God. Christ took care of that personally.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.