LOL According to Eastern European legend unbaptised dead babies become vampires.
Upvote
0
Question
- Thread starter zaksmummy
- Start date
yedida
Ruth Messianic, joining Israel, Na'aseh v'nishma!
That's about as good as one of the witch tests that would be conducted to ascertain the truth of the accusation: if the woman who was submerged in the water drowned, it was deemed that she had been innocent of the charge.
People are strange, so very strange....
Upvote
0
Jews have a age of accountability.. which sounds reasonable. Yeshua said the angels of children see the Father... in fact, Yeshua said that a milestone should be placed around the neck of anyone interfering with the children's access to Him.
Upvote
0
on a serious note, i dont believe in the Age of Acc, so i gladly agree to disagree with you 
Upvote
0
I think we both can agree, that the Lord can only wink at things to a point..Age not withstanding.
Upvote
0
- Jan 25, 2009
- 19,765
- 1,428
- Faith
- Oriental Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Others
As the Word says, children at times are not able to tell right from wrong:
Isaiah 7:16
But before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste.
Isaiah 7:15-17 Isaiah 7
As one source said best, as seen here in Genocide in the Old Testament: But before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste.
Isaiah 7:15-17 Isaiah 7
In the destruction of Jericho, Rahab and her family were spared because she feared God and chose to help the Israelites (Josh 2:1-21, 6:22-25). Before the Amalekites were destroyed, their righteous neighbors were warned to move away (1 Sam 15:5-6). God promised not to destroy Sodom if there were but ten righteous people in the city (Gen 18:22-32), and in a later judgment against Jerusalem, promised to forgive the city if one righteous person was found in it (Jer 5:1).
What about the children?
Small children did not share the guilt of their parents. The Bible describes small children as not knowing right from wrong (Is 7:15-16), and in some cases, this meant that they were spared the earthly punishment their elders received. For example, when the Israelites sinned during their wanderings in the desert, God forbid the adults from entering the promised land, but gave it to their children who were too young to be held responsible (Dt 1:34-39). The Bible also clearly teaches that one person is not held guilty for another's sin (Ezek 18). Therefore, the children who were killed would not face the same punishment in the afterlife as their parents.
What about the children?
Small children did not share the guilt of their parents. The Bible describes small children as not knowing right from wrong (Is 7:15-16), and in some cases, this meant that they were spared the earthly punishment their elders received. For example, when the Israelites sinned during their wanderings in the desert, God forbid the adults from entering the promised land, but gave it to their children who were too young to be held responsible (Dt 1:34-39). The Bible also clearly teaches that one person is not held guilty for another's sin (Ezek 18). Therefore, the children who were killed would not face the same punishment in the afterlife as their parents.
Upvote
0
I think it was during the Christianisation of Prussia, if I recall correctly, that the Church run into stiff opposition, so the priest in charge decided to drown some of the barbarians. Everything was going well, maybe too well because at one point the priest turned to one of the soldiers and instructed him to tie smaller stones around heathens' necks so they can have time to reflect before meeting their Maker.
Upvote
0
May that priest in charge had lots of time to reflect via Holy Spirit without ceasing until He meets with His Maker...
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- Jul 2, 2005
- 15,666
- 2,957
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
Stupid and incendiary thing to post on a Christian Forum.
Knowing the story, I would say that this is probably a myth, and at best a hostile spin on the facts written by half-wits who don't get politics and the Middle Ages. Let's not forget the true story of the dozens of peaceful missionaries killed by the pagans in Prussia well before the Teutonic Knights took it upon themselves to defend the converts there. Politics got mixed up with the good intentions of the martyred missionaries, as usual, and pagan kings fought with Christian ones. But then again I suspect you don't care about the real history, just the anti-Jesus/Church/MJ/Christian spin.
What people who write this stuff do is append every tragedy in history to the nominal religion of its protagonists, as if the Christian faith teaches violence to anyone. Quite pathetic really. How do you like Judaism attacked because of abuses like metzitzah b'peh, genocide (OT and some accuse Israel of it now) and a whole host of others ancient and modern- doesn't feel like justice, does it? That's how I feel when clowns come here and say junk like you just did and pretend that the Christian faith is all about atrocities committed by religious Christians.
How do you think you would react if I went to a Jewish forum and splatted rubbish about the civilians killed in the Lebanon Wars and labeled them as the crimes of "Judaism". I'd be booted off in a second and you'd feel insulted. Yet, we tolerate this kind of junk here. Very lucky you are to abuse your hosts and get away with it. Have a look at the purpose of these forums here at CF and think about your post in that light.
I hate to go off like this but you're just out of line.
Upvote
0
Actually the story of pagan Prussia is more than a story of convert protection by the Teutonic Knights. It's a tragic story of a wholesale genocide of entire people by crusading knights instigated by Konrad of Masovia. And yeah, it's more than religion. It's politics and imperilism and simple greed. But. You cannot erase the role the RCC played in the whole affair. BTW it's not junk. In the town I grew up in the city fathers traded the RCC clergy to the Hussites for beer. The beer was drunk, the clergy went up in smoke. History is not rainbows and unicorns, but I suspect it's not the message- it's the messanger, else you'd be just as livid with Yedida's post.
Upvote
0
yedida
Ruth Messianic, joining Israel, Na'aseh v'nishma!
My post came as a Christian against Christian history. There's a difference.
Just as my post was also as an American against America's past. Again, a difference from a Russian against America.
It's a well-known fact that siblings will fight tooth and nail with each other, but then defend to the death against anyone else saying or doing something against that same sibling.
Upvote
0
Lulav
Y'shua is His Name
Here's my post, the one I made before I got attacked:Lulav,
I think you have been picked on lately, but some things you say are provocative. Then throwing in opinion on one denominations view of virgins, vrigins birth- throws more "stuff" in the mix......
I was just succinctly answering the question posed by the OP. It is not my 'opinion' it is just what it is. The original Church (the RCC) is who came up with this doctrine, it is not something that Jews believe. Also because of this doctrine of theirs, they had to make it so that Mary was immaculately conceived as well as having an immaculate conception of Jesus. I didn't make this up, nor is it my opinion.
Perfect Virgin
Perfect Virgin Mary,
your perfect virgin life
began with a miraculous virgin conception
and a miraculous virgin birth.
By virtue of your Divine Son Jesus Christ's perfect virginity,
of which your perfect virginity is but an imitation,
from which your perfect virginity proceeds,
grant chastity, modesty, and humility
to us, who trust in your perfect virginity,
and to the whole world.
Amen.
"God desired
that the Virginity of Mary,
the Mother of Jesus Christ,
be so perfect, complete, and all-encompassing
that even the manner of her Immaculate Conception
and her Holy Birth
were required by God
to be entirely Virginal,
occurring solely and entirely by a miracle of God,
and not in the usual way."
The only thing I see wrong with my post is that I should have said 'dogma' instead of 'doctrine'. This makes it an even stronger beliefs by millions.
What does that have to do with the OP about original sin?
BTW, I think it's a bit outrageous myself, but then again they don't do offerings.
But neither this nor Shabbat rules has anything to do with the OP. The topic wasWhy not stick with discussing the topic, using your knowledge of the Hebrew scriptures? I think this area is your strong point and adds a lot of depth to discussions.
I think I was sticking to the topic, namely original sin and that is is a catholic doctrine (dogma).
Upvote
0
Lulav
Y'shua is His Name
Original sin
From what I recalled it was an invention of the RCC, or from someone within. I had to go and look it up as it is not something I keep on the front burners of my memory banks.
Seems this doctrine or dogma was originally formed almost 400 years after the first coming.
Apparently St. Augustine was a Roman Algerian convert to Christianity and his writings were very influential on on the development of Western Christianity. He is given credit for the framing the concepts of original sin.
According to Eugene TeSelle, In his book titled 'Augustine the Theologian' he says that
It is interesting to note that Augustine converted to Christianity after leaving it for other religions for many years by reading the letter to the Romans written by Paul. Which is where he gets his ideas about original sin from.
Romans 5:12-21
How did we get stuck in the middle in the first place? and why wasn't this rectified immediately instead of 4000 years after it happened?
Now it seems that Augustine was following on the coat tails of Iraneus, who in the second century CE began to develop this in reactions to certain 'heretics'.
From what I recalled it was an invention of the RCC, or from someone within. I had to go and look it up as it is not something I keep on the front burners of my memory banks.
Seems this doctrine or dogma was originally formed almost 400 years after the first coming.
Apparently St. Augustine was a Roman Algerian convert to Christianity and his writings were very influential on on the development of Western Christianity. He is given credit for the framing the concepts of original sin.
According to Eugene TeSelle, In his book titled 'Augustine the Theologian' he says that
Now if he could, why can't anyone else? Besides that, notice that he used his own understanding and philosophy to do so?
It is interesting to note that Augustine converted to Christianity after leaving it for other religions for many years by reading the letter to the Romans written by Paul. Which is where he gets his ideas about original sin from.
Romans 5:12-21
Talk about circular reasoning. ........
So the penalty of death was still 'reigning' over those who did not sin.........
Does this even sound plausible? Because of the act of one man we all, every single human being, are condemned. But then because of one mans obedience we are then made righteous?
How did we get stuck in the middle in the first place? and why wasn't this rectified immediately instead of 4000 years after it happened?
Now it seems that Augustine was following on the coat tails of Iraneus, who in the second century CE began to develop this in reactions to certain 'heretics'.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
I hope I don't come across as snarky, but we're talking here(in a moment of levity) about things that happened 700 years ago in the times that institutionalized religion was a source of evil. I don't see why an American would be upset about history in the backwood corner somewhere between the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Dutchy of Lithuania. What's next, standing up for the conquistadors on the religious grounds? One thing is for sure. This gigantic overreaction serves as a reminder that in the end I am but a Jew on a Christian forum and different rules apply. This "clown" understands it. Now, back to the original thread-whatever it was.
Upvote
0
- Jul 2, 2005
- 15,666
- 2,957
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
jcpro said:
Oh please...get it a rest. It's not about YOU. You said something that is out of line for someone with your faith icon, and now you added fuel to the fire. Others with Jewish faith icons have learned how to post here without being so incendiary and negative towards Christianity/MJism/Jesus etc. You haven't settled in yet, but you would do well to learn from them. (But I still do wonder if you have posted here before under another nick)
Can you not lay self-defense down for a second and try to read what I said and answer the questions?
Here are the questions again:
1) How do you like Judaism attacked because of abuses like metzitzah b'peh, genocide (OT and some accuse Israel of it now) and a whole host of others ancient and modern?
2) How do you think you would react if I went to a Jewish forum and splatted rubbish about the civilians killed in the Lebanon Wars and labeled them as the crimes of "Judaism"?
Upvote
0
- Jul 2, 2005
- 15,666
- 2,957
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
You said
"Original sin is a doctrine, used by the church to control the people. This is to give them control over not just your life but your money too."
Prove it.
Prove it. I want names, dates, official statements and teachings that say that Original Sin was invented to control people. Not just opinion. Give us the evidence.
As above.
I believe in Original Sin, and not in the Immaculate Conception. Explain the belief of myself and billions throughout history who are not RC yet accept Original Sin and reject the Immaculate Conception. We have no problem reconciling the two based on scripture.
No. The only problem with your post is that you made the absolutely baseless and wild claim that Original Sin was invented by the church to control people, and now you claim that this is a fact. Prove it. You'd be the first ever to do so. Ever.
I think I was sticking to the topic, namely original sin and that is is a catholic doctrine (dogma).
I can bury you in citations from the ECFs that they believed in Original Sin, well before the canon was settled or the Papacy rose to political prominence. I cannot find the guy, Pope or teacher that "invented" it with the express purpose of controlling the masses. I think that is an anti-Church myth.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Similar threads
