Strengthen your faith in the bible Christians.

I am making a Vatican/Catholic post soon.. If you are in this Church, run away today! I pray thee. It is the devils church. Probably not though in this thread.

Praise the Lord in all things! Amen.

 

Having given up on Ramble as hopelessly screwed up, I'd like to talk more to you. Who was this "true founder of Christianity who was a pagan until the day he died?" On that point, I share Ramble's view that the founder of Christianity was Jesus, or you might make a case for Paul; but neither were pagans at any point in their lives. Are you perhaps talking about Emperor Constantine, who presided over the Nicaen council? He continued his devotion to Apollo until late in life. but I would hardly call him the 'true founer of Christianity'. And what things that Jesus did did Mithras do earlier? The Zoroastrian Mithra of Zoroastrian and later Manichaen became Mithras in Roman mystery religion. Whether his deeds preceded or followed those of Jesus is a matter of debate, since some of the features often cited as similar to Christianity may actually have borrowed from Christianity as both religions competed in Rome.

 

I believe in God, so I already look foolish in the eyes of atheists.

Also even if mankind should figure out how God "did it", that would still not prove that God didn't "do it".

That is pretty much what I believe and don't particularly think it is a "silly thing".

Yep.

 

I'd even challange that he presided over the Nicene Council. He definetly wanted to end the in-fighting over the Divinity of Christ as well as the Christological relationship between Jesus and the Father.

The Homousian position, though agreed upon by the grace of the Holy Spirit, did not gain full support and Arians still persisted for a long while (and resurged again at the Turn of the 19th/20th Centuries). Constatine himself it could be argued did not agree with teh Creed of the Council, being baptised by an Arian bishop on his death-bed.

 

Are you so sure that God didn't do it? Are you so sure that Life could start on it's own? If Adam and Eve didn't exist, then why Jesus, the last Adam who became a life-giving spirit?

(1 Corinthians 3:18-20) Let no one be seducing himself: If anyone among YOU thinks he is wise in this system of things, let him become a fool, that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God; for it is written: “He catches the wise in their own cunning.” And again: “Jehovah knows that the reasonings of the wise men are futile.”

 

Okay.

 

It is however, the perfect bible? God gave it to us? God promised?

I wouldn't call a translation of the Bible that mistranslates the tetragrammaton some 6000 times perfect.

God didn't give us the KJV, King James did. You might want to read the dedication to the KJV.
http://comingintheclouds.org/studyhelps/kjvdedication.htm

And where did God promise us the KJV?

 

How can the "best" mistranslatea single word, the tetragrammaton, some 6000 times and still be considered the "best".

And that does not even take into consideration the fact that the KJV contains spurious verse that are not found in the early original language manuscripts.

And the fact that the translators of the KJV dedicated the KJV to King James and not to God doesn't suggest that KJV have an agenda.

 

Oh, I am not sure at all. The origins debate is not a big part of my faith life. I just try to love God and honour him in the Blessed Sacrament, and when I do stumble, go to Confession and ask for forgiveness and receive absolution. It is just a simple way to strive for holiness.

You definietly give a lot to chew on in terms of Paul's exhortation to the Corinthian community (they had some serious issues them). I tend to look at Paul's writing as Scripture two ways 1) speaking to those communities in time, and then 2) speaking to modern issues.

Sure, there are those who claim expertise and knowledge and defer to the realm of reason or common sense and deride our faith. Paul also wrote that christ is foolishness to the unbelievers. The Suffering Servent to save humankind and rectify all of Creation; this, for the "enlightened" is foolishness.

I welcome it. Please, if it pleases you, we can likely get into more detail with less interuption also via PM. I am one of the few Catholics that frequent this section of the fora. Again, if it so pleases.

 

Anyone think Christianity is congruent with isolation?

 

Although it is possible to be isolated and a Christian, it is not condusive to the Christian life and isolating yourself completely.

This is likely one of the reasons for Athanasius' Vita of St Anthony of the Desert. Basically St Anthony after hearing the word of God sold all his things and become one of the first hermits (St Paul the Hermit is first) and due to his holiness began to draw people towards him. As much as he retreated, they continued to congregate and many became monks in a community. Some stayed in their traditional roles, but come to St Anothny for teaching in return for food and sustinence. (Paraphrased; I also reccommend the Life of St Anthony as a good spiritual read).

There is a reason we are called ekklesia, or those "called out together".

 

No

 

One of the problems I have with the OP's King James Only position is that we have no way of knowing what the original manuscripts of the Old Testament said--because we don't have them.We have some 5,500 Greek manuscripts, some of these only fragments.The earliest of these is P52, a 2.5x3.5 inch fragment of John, chp. 18, to the first part of the second century--circa 125-130 AD, plus or minus 25 years. This was not an original. We have no originals, nor even first copies, copies of those, copies of those,etc. We have a dozen manuscripts from the second century, sixty-four from the third, forty-eight from the fourth. But 94% of them were produced seven centuries after the original. And as Bart Ehrman oten says, there are more differences among them than there are words in the New Testament--some 300,000 to 400,000 variants. (For every one of the 140,000 words in the Greek New Testament, there are between two and three variants.) The great majority of these over 99%), are spelling or grammatical slips, but there are some that can be considered to be meaningful. For example, what is the number of the Beast? 666 or 616. The oldest extant manuscript of Revelation 13 says 616. Ehrman, in Misquoting Jesus, comments:
'Was Jesus and angry man? [Mark 1:41]/ Was he completely distraught
in the face of death?[/Hebrews 2:9] Did he tell his disciples they could
drink poison without being harmed?[Mark16:9-20]? Did he let an adultress
off the hook with nothing but a mild warning [John 7:53-811]? Is Jesus
actually called the "unique God" there[John1:18]?Does the New Testament
indicate that even the Son of God himself does not know when the end will
come [Matther24:36]? These questions go on and on and all of them are
related to how one resolves difficulties in the manuscript tradition as it has
become known to us?"
The passage about handling poisonous snakes that has spawned Christian sects in the Appalachians doesn't exist in the earliest manuscripts, nor does the story about Jesus saving the adultress from stoning. And this is just the copying problem. Compounding this is the translation problem from Greek to Elizabethan English--not to mention the problems of the books that were excluded from the Canon, and the accuracy and authorship of the anonymous originals attributed to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Those who rely on "faith' as the way to resolve these problems should also be able to explain why the problems exist in the first place.

 

What more is needed for Christian life than simply being a Christian?
You say it's possible but not conducive in the same sentence.

I guess the idea is that a certain aspect of being a Christian excludes isolation? Which part would that be that couldn't be described as extraneous?

 

Short term yes.
Long term no.

Jesus was in the wilderness for 40 days and Paul after being converted went into the Arabian desert by himself. They eventually used what they learned to help people though.

 

hallucinating in the desert, Sure didnt help much from the look of the world today.

 

This goes to the very heart of the question of "What is it to be a Christian". I may call myself a Christian, beleive fully, but why would I separate myself from the Body of Christ. Congfregation builds and strengthens out faith and love of god. There is a reason why Christians still gather where it is illegal to gather and worship God freely. There were martyrs in the past for this, and there are still those under oppression.

Yes, it is possible to segregate yourself, or to be segregated (not by choice), but living a life like this removes the strength and support God gives us from others in the Body. It is possible to live in isolation, but it is not very beneficial. That is what I mean by possible, but not condusive.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=acts 20:7-20:7&version=DRA
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+corinthians 16:2-16:2&version=DRA

Seems pretty clear to me that it was expected and it is implicit in Paul's speach and writings that we are to gather as a community on the Lord's Day. So if we skip Mass (or whatever) on Sunday it is not only a sin against God, but also the other members of the Body of Christ.

 

Hey, Neo. Long time. I guess the question is, how isolated are you talking--on a scale from one to ten, with one being hermit and 10 being commune? I'm unaffiliated but not isolated. I take fellowship with Orthodox, Progressive Christian, and freethinker groups, to get a variety of perspectives. There's a particular group in Ponca consisting mostly of Disciples of Christ, Methodists, and Episcopalians that I have a strong rapport with. It is, as the saying goes, "Spirit-filled", and besides, my girlfriend goes to it. But it's not a church. It's an interdenominational social gathering with religious discussion. There's also that crazy group of Christian Jungians in Coyle. Since I believe that humans are made in God's image and likeness and that being in the presence of a human being is being in the real presence of God, I see it choice between being in Heaven (if that's the right term for any place in Oklahoma in this heat!) and sorting my sock drawer.
I do think that membership in any group carries a big danger of groupthink--with subtle and not so subtle pressures to conform to the group norms and worldview. I tend to go to groups who share my outlook, and therefore, for better or for worse, reinforce my beliefs and prejudices.

 

"What it means to be a Christian" is something I've struggled with for a long time.

I get what you are saying, and also that in some sense, "isolation" could even be seen as a state of self-service.
What if a person finds that submersing themselves in society removes the strength and support they feel from God while in isolation?

Are you Catholic?
For the sake of the conversation, I would like to keep the subject of "what it means to be a Christian" in the broadest range possible. To me personally, I feel like that excludes denominationality and whatever Paul said, since Paul isn't Christ.
What always gets me in trouble in conversations with Christians is that I don't necessarily believe the Bible is the word of God and that I don't necessarily adhere to everything in it. Especially when it comes to the teachings of people like Paul.
In Christian terminology, I'm more moved by the Spirit than anything, so often times I can come off as contradicting myself, or as not even a Christian at all.
Sorry if that happens, it isn't intentional.

For instance, gathering on Sunday. I haven't gone to church in over ten years. It isn't because I hate it or disrespect the tradition, but rather because I never felt any real calling to go and never felt like my time spent there was meaningful. Yet at the same time, I'll go to the store, exchange change for receipt with the cashier, then go into my car and openly weep because I feel like I've just experienced something divine and transcendent.

This is why I often have to question the rigidity of specific teachings and why I said I'm moved by the Spirit more than anything. If I go to a Church for the sake of propriety and appearances, yet I feel that it is utterly pointless and that nothing good is coming of it, can my absence be said to be a sin? To me, holy communion with others is much broader than showing up at a specific place during a specific day.

It's the same reason I won't say grace for my food unless I can muster up genuine feelings and truly mean it.

Me personally? Probably about a 2 or 3.
I agree with everything you said, but if anything I feel that my isolation makes me even more appreciative of people (sometimes even unjustly so) when I do have to venture out into the world. But to submerse myself in that environment all the time....I feel like I just couldn't do it, that it wouldn't be healthy for me, or that something would be lost. It's rather hard to explain, but I do want to make it clear that my isolation isn't the result of any negative feelings towards people.

 

As self-assured in my faith as I may seem, I think this is somehting most christians never fully work out. Look at St Francis of Assisi. To him being a follower of Christ meant taking the exhortation from Jesus to the Rich Man (i.e. sell everyhting, own nothing) to the extreme. Owned nothing, romaed the countryside and lived of the kindness of the laity. Spent Lent in a cave and was only occasionally visited by a couple close friends (also Friars).

Yet he belonged to a Church, as I do, that uses precious metals in our liturgical sacrifice as a sign of our love for God and devotion to him.

I can see how someone may struggle.

That is quite possibly why any number of holy men and women became hermits.

It could also be that you simply are an extreme introvert. I myself am one and my wife has no idea why I want to leave her to go spend a day or three wandering around tiny creeks fly fishing for tiny trout. That is my recharge. I can pray, think, and generally poder unincombered by any modern distraction.

Isolation and withdrawal are merely two forms of a larger ascetic ideology and spirituality. It is definetly not for everyone (I for one was called to matrimony). People will generally regard ascetics as stranger, dangerous, and powerful in that danger. Look at St John the Baptist, he was regarded as a prophet, Elijah, and by some at first the Messiah.

I do not want to be misunderstood: I do not think that isolation is bad, or is always detrimental---but generally speaking the Christian life is a communal life sharing in God's love. Once we start talking about hermits and ascetics, we are getting a lot more mystical.

AS I referenced before, here is the Vita of St Anthony of the Desert: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2811.htm

Yes, I am. I did not mean the statement about missing Mass to come off as sectarian, that is why I added the "or whatever". The thinking is that we have a holy obligation to celebrate the Lord's Passion and Ressurection. According to the Church, this is done at Mass when the Sacrifice of the Blessed Sacrament makes present the sacrifice at Cavalry. Major sin to miss it for frivolous reasons.

I was once where you are in you belief (or at least I think I was based off of your statements). Search "Burbot" in the main Christian forum, then find the oldest posts and I am asking tonnes of questions relating to Bible authorship, validity, etc. I also though Cahtolics were idol worshippers and basically evil. Oh what prayer will do.