Ask God for Me

[Clizby WampusCat]

That's funny! I don't feel all that confused by the ongoing developments of thought in the Christian Church (i.e. 1st Century / Catholic / Orthodox / Anglican / Various Protestants) for the last 2,000 years.
....Granted, I'm dazed a little by it all, but not confused !!

Good for you!

 

[Oncedeceived]

What you have found is the Christ United Methodist Church not the United Methodist Church. Seems that even Christians get confused because there are so many denominations.

Denominations yes. However, I am not taking your word on that and I'll have to look into it.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Have you tried the Nicene Creed?

Seriously, I'm not impressed. I was once a non-believer, and it wasn't at all hard to track down information on the history of Christian doctrine.

I am not trying to impress you. There were many different thoughts about doctrine in the early church. You can find many writings on the subject. Many Christians do not know how their bible came to be in the form it is today or should I say forms. It was hardly directed by God.

 

[miknik5]

The Christians Gnostic's for example. But this does not matter because if you want to go down the road that if the early Christians believed something that is what the doctrine is then you must throw out the doctrine of the trinity for example. A doctrine that when it was formally introduced in the 3rd century and was opposed by most Christians at the time.

But you are diverting my point. The early Christians did not have a bible as you have today, so saying you must adhere to its teachings to be a christian will then lead to having to say the early Christians were not real Christians.

The Christian Gnostics did believe that JESUS died for them...they just talked more about HIS teachings

 

[Oncedeceived]

I am not trying to impress you. There were many different thoughts about doctrine in the early church. You can find many writings on the subject. Many Christians do not know how their bible came to be in the form it is today or should I say forms. It was hardly directed by God.

I think you have been misinformed.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You haven't shown there are thousands of sects.

I have not demonstrated that water is wet either. But this article alone mentions at least hundreds of them:

List of Christian denominations - Wikipedia

I did not claim that there are tens of thousands since that figure is arguably inflated. But even articles such as the following, that refutes the claim of "33,000 Protestants" admits that there are on the order of 9,000 protestant sects:

We Need to Stop Saying That There Are 33,000 Protestant Denominations

 

[Subduction Zone]

Look Clizby, you don't have to worry about what one Christian says vs. what another Christian says. You have to worry that you are not making a mistake by not accepting Jesus to cover your sins. That is the bottom line, and it matters to you personally not to me not to Tinker, not anyone but you. You are the one that needs the truth and finding it makes all the difference.

And how do you know that? Since Christian apologetics is about defending Christianity how would you do so? How can you demonstrate that your religion is the correct religion?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

No, I really do not care when apologists write anything. I have found that far too many of them are "liars for Jesus". I was wondering if you had anything of merit that supported your claims. Sadly that does not appear to be the case.

Nope. I've got absolutely nothing for you, just as you expected. See? Sometimes, you do get what you expect!

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Good for you!

Yes, it is good for me! Quite so in fact!

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nope. I've got absolutely nothing for you, just as you expected. See? Sometimes, you do get what you expect!

That indicates that your claims were empty.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

That indicates that your claims were empty.

No, I've looked over my shoulder at my bookshelves, and they remain as full as ever. My university diploma is still where I left it last, too, it appears. Did you expect some of those things to suddenly disappear or something?

Not as if you really cared about any of that, though, right?

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, I've looked over my shoulder at my bookshelves, and they remain as full as ever. My university diploma is still where I left it last, too, it appears. Did you expect some of those things to suddenly disappear or something?

Not as if you really cared about any of that, though, right?

A diploma is worthless if one cannot apply it. In fact it is just another empty claim. Your diploma may be in the wrong discipline to be a proper authority at any rate.

 

[Silmarien]

I am not trying to impress you. There were many different thoughts about doctrine in the early church. You can find many writings on the subject. Many Christians do not know how their bible came to be in the form it is today or should I say forms. It was hardly directed by God.

Of course you can find many writings on the subject of doctrine of the early church. It's called Patristics (or sometimes Patrology). I don't get this "poor confused non-believer can't figure out how to look into historical questions" narrative. Everything is accessible, so you can study it. The fact that many Christians believe crazy things about their history is irrelevant.

 

[Silmarien]

Nope, where did you get that crazy idea from? Ignoring or trying to dishonestly defend the role of different sects of Christianity and other religions in wars is apologetics.

I provided a rundown on the political history behind the Reformation, i.e., the conflicts within the Holy Roman Empire between the emperor and the Germanic lords. There's nothing dishonest about actually knowing enough about the time period to have a better idea of what the politics actually looked like. That's not apologetics; it's medievalism. I like the Spanish Habsburgs.

If I got the "crazy idea" that you considered all of European history to be Christian apologetics, it's because you totally ignored my point because it didn't match up with your narrative that political disagreement springs from theological disagreement. It's actually extremely common in secular historical studies to question to what extent religious disagreement played a crucial role in conflicts--most historians have a much more nuanced and subtle view on the matter than the anti-religious polemics you've been engaging in here.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

A diploma is worthless if one cannot apply it. In fact it is just another empty claim. Your diploma may be in the wrong discipline to be a proper authority at any rate.

Well then, it kind of sounds like you had already dismissed me in your mind before I could even begin.

Alright. Enjoy the silence. That's what you'll get unless you continue to pop up your ugly strata here and badger my brethren. If you do that, then I'll take you to task, time permitting.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Look Clizby, you don't have to worry about what one Christian says vs. what another Christian says. You have to worry that you are not making a mistake by not accepting Jesus to cover your sins. That is the bottom line, and it matters to you personally not to me not to Tinker, not anyone but you. You are the one that needs the truth and finding it makes all the difference.

So you are not going to attempt to answer my questions or provide evidence. Just assert that I have sins and need them forgiven.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

The Christian Gnostics did believe that JESUS died for them...they just talked more about HIS teachings

Can you provide a source for this?

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

I think you have been misinformed.

You can read the writings of the early Christians for yourself.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Of course you can find many writings on the subject of doctrine of the early church. It's called Patristics (or sometimes Patrology). I don't get this "poor confused non-believer can't figure out how to look into historical questions" narrative.

What? I have never said this at all. Where have I said I have not looked into the origins of Christianity. I am not confused, most Christians are because they have never looked into the origins of their beliefs.

Everything is accessible, so you can study it. The fact that many Christians believe crazy things about their history is irrelevant.

I have and concluded that there were many disagreements about doctrine and one side won out. There is no indication of god intervening to sort it out for them. My point is that not all early Christians believed the same things about doctrine.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I provided a rundown on the political history behind the Reformation, i.e., the conflicts within the Holy Roman Empire between the emperor and the Germanic lords. There's nothing dishonest about actually knowing enough about the time period to have a better idea of what the politics actually looked like. That's not apologetics; it's medievalism. I like the Spanish Habsburgs.

If I got the "crazy idea" that you considered all of European history to be Christian apologetics, it's because you totally ignored my point because it didn't match up with your narrative that political disagreement springs from theological disagreement. It's actually extremely common in secular historical studies to question to what extent religious disagreement played a crucial role in conflicts--most historians have a much more nuanced and subtle view on the matter than the anti-religious polemics you've been engaging in here.

You effectively tried to change the argument. Yes, politics were always part of the wars, but ignoring that religion was at the base of it all is inexcusable. And what "anti-religion polemics"? Just stating reality.