Religion Thread: ...and suddenly, everyone's a theology scholar

[Kepler]

Re: Religion Thread: ...and suddenly, everyone's a theology scholar

very single Christian I've ever heard voice an opinion on the matter believes Jesus is part of the trinity and voicing of God.

Aren't there a significant number of Christians who don't believe in a trinity at all? For that matter, the trinity is not itself in the Gospels, and Jesus didn't say anything about it, so why accept an interpretation that came much later?

It seems like a kluge with a navy.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: Religion Thread: ...and suddenly, everyone's a theology scholar

Aren't here a significant number of Christians who don't believe in a trinity at all? For that matter, the trinity is not itself in the Gospels, and Jesus didn't say anything about it, so why accept a interpretation that came much later?

Mormons don't believe in the Trinity. They're probably the largest non-Trinitarian group. Distant second would be Jehovah's Witnesses. There's a handful of other minor offshoots. In total, maybe 30 million Xtians worldwide are non-Trinitarian.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Religion Thread: ...and suddenly, everyone's a theology scholar

Mormons don't believe in the Trinity. They're probably the largest non-Trinitarian group. Distant second would be Jehovah's Witnesses. There's a handful of other minor offshoots. In total, maybe 30 million Xtians worldwide are non-Trinitarian.

Here's 90 million more.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miaphysitism

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: Religion Thread: ...and suddenly, everyone's a theology scholar

Here's 90 million more.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miaphysitism

I'm not sure that's a rejection of the Trinity concept, but more a distinction between Jesus having two separate natures (as most of Christendom holds - uniquely god and uniquely man) vs. one nature that is equally divine and human.

Non-Trinitarians would say that Jesus is the Son of God, and is more than a man, but is not divine/God himself.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Religion Thread: ...and suddenly, everyone's a theology scholar

Got news for you, the gospels were written by man and only "inspired" by God, too (with some help from the Church along the way). So parsing the definition of inspired the way you do doesn't get around the fact that mainstream Christianity, ie the Christianity the rest of us deal with on a day to day basis, believes in the entirety of the Bible.

Your point was the whole bible is 'word of God'...and obviously, the bible is 'inspired by God' in its entirety. The 'Word of God' is Jesus'/God's direct actions and language in the gospels and that makes them the biblical priority...regardless of the status of their writing. Your next pivot?

Aren't there a significant number of Christians who don't believe in a trinity at all? For that matter, the trinity is not itself in the Gospels, and Jesus didn't say anything about it, so why accept an interpretation that came much later?

Best case then...>95% of Christians believe in the trinity. In a worse case, a decent percentage of those still believe Jesus to be son of God or some such which still makes my point that put Jesus as the biblical priority for nearly all true Christians.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: Religion Thread: ...and suddenly, everyone's a theology scholar

I think that's fair. It's sort of like what Muslims believe about Jesus and Muhammad being prophets (with Muhammad being the last and most important one), and spiritually perfect, but not divine.

Look, we could argue this all day, but the fact is that there are an awful lot of misguided, phony Christians out there according to your definition, 5mn. Do you attend an organized Christian church, or are you an independent believer who has only ever read the Gospels (since, per your belief, they're the only part of the common Biblical canon that matters)?

 

[Kepler]

Re: Religion Thread: ...and suddenly, everyone's a theology scholar

my point that put Jesus as the biblical priority for nearly all true Christians.

I didn't see anybody arguing that point. I mean, "Christ" is right in the name "Christian" and all.

Harry Dean Stanton's character in Wise Blood preached about the Church without Christ.

 

[unofan]

Your point was the whole bible is 'word of God'...and obviously, the bible is 'inspired by God' in its entirety. The 'Word of God' is Jesus'/God's direct actions and language in the gospels and that makes them the biblical priority...regardless of the status of their writing. Your next pivot?

The "Word of God" for the vast majority of Christendom is the entire Bible. That you don't believe that to be the case because you personally practice a fairly unique form of Christianity doesn't make that theological fact somehow less true.

"Inspired" in this case doesn't mean it's less than the Word of God for its believers. Just as classifying something as a "theory" for scientists means something more than a "theory" to the average Joe Blow on the street.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Religion Thread: ...and suddenly, everyone's a theology scholar

I interpret 5mn's statements of "fact" to be nothing less (or more) than the tenets of his religion. That is the hallmark of religion (or magic): believing makes it so.

<img src="https://i.imgur.com/eRbvIbO.jpg" height="300" / >

Believers are caught in a Catch-22. Treating their beliefs as just another of thousands of competing theories is sacrilegious and will anger Zeus, or at the least means you aren't playing the game right.

<img src="https://i1.wp.com/maverickchristians.com/images/good_grief_i_said_if.png" height="300" />

We joke, but think of how awful it must be to have all that riding on your constant belief. Dr. Mrs. says she can't sleep in the car passenger seat because if she falls asleep we will veer into oncoming traffic. Her concentration is the air traffic beam we fly on. Now imagine that pressure, 24/7, and with your immortal soul riding on it.

What is intellectual insincerity compared to that?

 

[leswp1]

Re: Religion Thread: ...and suddenly, everyone's a theology scholar

FSM:

<img src="https://img00.deviantart.net/bbaa/i/2009/108/4/5/fsm_nativity_scene_by_phoenixphire24.jpg" height="300" />

Love the eye patch on the sheep

No.

First, every single Christian I've ever heard voice an opinion on the matter believes Jesus is part of the trinity and voicing of God. Jesus is the Gospels...and that is all. Any Christian that behaves in a manner not aligned with the teachings of Jesus is no true Christian.

Second...as wiki says, 'Christianity regards the biblical canon, the Old Testament and the New Testament, as the inspired word of God.' It is not the Word of God - that is the only Gospels. Jesus, who is God, downplayed much of the OT and countered other parts. Yet again, why would I do differently?

You have the most unique view of Christianity and some interesting assumptions.

Aren't there a significant number of Christians who don't believe in a trinity at all? For that matter, the trinity is not itself in the Gospels, and Jesus didn't say anything about it, so why accept an interpretation that came much later?

It seems like a kluge with a navy.

A bunch. Coptics, Christian Scientists, Scientology, some Pentacostals, Unitarians, Quakers, in there too.
Went on a google adventure. One survey- In this survey, LifeWay reports concerning the church doctrine of the Trinity, “Seven out of 10 Americans (69 percent) agree there is one true God in three persons: God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. Six in 10 say Jesus is both divine and human (61 percent).”
Read more at http://www.patheos.com/blogs/kermitzarleyblog/2017/05/americans-believe-trinity/#QmhWKvzo0We8bED2.99

BTW, a prenup is grounds for annulment in the Catholic Church (since a prenup supposes a divorce, it signals that the parties did not intend a lifetime commitment).

Huh. That is interesting.

 

[leswp1]

Re: Religion Thread: ...and suddenly, everyone's a theology scholar

This is interesting too.
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct...oll-finds-evangelicals-favorite-heresies.html

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: Religion Thread: ...and suddenly, everyone's a theology scholar

A bunch. Coptics, Christian Scientists, Scientology, some Pentacostals, Unitarians, Quakers, in there too.

Scientology is based on the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth?

Forgot about the Christian Scientists and the Quakers. Good call. I think the various flavors of Pentacostalism cover most of the minor offshoots I mentioned.

 

[leswp1]

Re: Religion Thread: ...and suddenly, everyone's a theology scholar

Scientology is based on the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth?

Forgot about the Christian Scientists and the Quakers. Good call. I think the various flavors of Pentacostalism cover most of the minor offshoots I mentioned.

THere was an article with a nice list but I was too lazy to type.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Religion Thread: ...and suddenly, everyone's a theology scholar

Scientology is based on the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth?

Scientology is based on the teachings of L. Ron of Nebraska.

 

[burd]

Re: Religion Thread: ...and suddenly, everyone's a theology scholar

BTW, a prenup is grounds for annulment in the Catholic Church (since a prenup supposes a divorce, it signals that the parties did not intend a lifetime commitment).

Interesting. Does that mean Catholics believe health insurance means you are not committed to health or that auto insurance means you are not committed to accident free driving?

 

[Kepler]

Re: Religion Thread: ...and suddenly, everyone's a theology scholar

BTW, a prenup is grounds for annulment in the Catholic Church (since a prenup supposes a divorce, it signals that the parties did not intend a lifetime commitment).

Huh. That is genuinely insane.

Given that kind of, well, let's call it "reasoning," I'm a little surprised the Catholic Church considers a marriage with a prenup to be a marriage at all. They should probably condemn sex inside of a marriage with a prenup as "fornication."

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: Religion Thread: ...and suddenly, everyone's a theology scholar

To be fair, it is supposed to be "until death do us part". Civil divorce doesn't count in the eyes of the Catholic hierarchy, and in the old days they'd refuse you communion if you shacked up or remarried someone else (it was considered adultery). Nowadays "The Church of Nice" will wag their finger, but that's about it. It's a lot easier to get an annulment too, if you do some legwork and donate some money.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Religion Thread: ...and suddenly, everyone's a theology scholar

Look, the fact is that there are an awful lot of misguided, phony Christians out there according to your definition, 5mn. Do you attend an organized Christian church, or are you an independent believer who has only ever read the Gospels (since, per your belief, they're the only part of the common Biblical canon that matters)?

Yes there are. I go to a Mpls city church and I will say that most everyone I communicate with talks strictly about love and compassion. They never talk about homosexuality, abortion, etc. I'm guessing like me these culture war platforms are very low priority...and due to that, I believe they inherently get the concepts of Jesus first. Of course, I know many 'misguided' Christians also. And this is a guess, but it might be tied to political persuasion...as in conservatives focus on homosexuality, etc first. From all my interactions, I do believe that this group is putting their personal feelings ahead of Jesus. That's my opinion.

I interpret 5mn's statements of "fact" to be nothing less (or more) than the tenets of his religion. That is the hallmark of religion (or magic): believing makes it so.

We joke, but think of how awful it must be to have all that riding on your constant belief. Dr. Mrs. says she can't sleep in the car passenger seat because if she falls asleep we will veer into oncoming traffic. Her concentration is the air traffic beam we fly on. Now imagine that pressure, 24/7, and with your immortal soul riding on it.

I've talked plenty about how I think the bible, Christianity, etc. provides a pretty awesome life tool for many - this in terms of both helping improving one's life and helping that take action on their updated morality. Here you question that. Let me put some meat to those bones; Pew put out a survey last year:

Improving one's life: As a percentage, one-third more highly religious are 'very happy with the way things are going in life' than those that are not highly religious (40% vs. 29%).
Taking action on morality: As a percentage, one-half more highly religious volunteer and donate time/money/goods than do those that are not highly religious (45% vs. 28% and 65% vs. 41% respectively)

All that pressure of afterlife doesn't really seem to be having much of an effect.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Religion Thread: ...and suddenly, everyone's a theology scholar

I've talked plenty about how I think the bible, Christianity, etc. provides a pretty awesome life tool for many - this in terms of both helping improving one's life and helping that take action on their updated morality. Here you question that.

I have never questioned that. As I have said a billion times, and as you have ignored each time, if believing in God or little green men or Russell's teapot makes you treat other human beings better then PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE keep those beliefs.

You are questioned here because you make endless inane and ignorant statements about what being a non-believer means.

On matters of your faith you are the expert. On matters of other theists' faiths you seem to be pretty weak and ignorant, as they have told you, but honestly we're talking about different crayons so I pay it no mind. On matters of theism vs atheism you have shown yourself a fool.

That just can't be that hard to understand. Nobody cares what you believe; nobody is trying to suppress you. Your faith is like somebody's baby pictures on Facebook -- vitally important and endlessly fascinating to you and no doubt a source of great joy and meaning. To the rest of us, well... internet lint.

If you stopped making mindless statements about what being an atheist is driven by your empty-headed, lofo agenda, nobody would bother you ever again.

 

[joecct]

To be fair, it is supposed to be "until death do us part". Civil divorce doesn't count in the eyes of the Catholic hierarchy, and in the old days they'd refuse you communion if you shacked up or remarried someone else (it was considered adultery). Nowadays "The Church of Nice" will wag their finger, but that's about it. It's a lot easier to get an annulment too, if you do some legwork and donate some money.

Money is not necessary. And annulment in this country are fairly quick (year or so). However in a lot of other countries (Argentina for example), it can take a looonnnnggggg time.