Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 8/5/2005 5:26:12 AM EDT

Today’s topic (not trolling) is the latent roots of Christianity.

Over the past few years I’ve been comparing Christianity, Scripture, the contemporary church, and history.

What I’ve learned is that although Christianity was born out of the Jewish faith, in its practices it bears a closer resemblance to ancient Rome than Judaism.

Many of the practices of the church are the result of syncretism, taking elements of pagan beliefs and dressing them up in a Christian veneer, then adopting them into Christian worship.

Consider Christmas (always a sensitive topic!). For the first three-and-a-half centuries of Christianity there was no Christmas. Constantine wanted to implement Christianity in the Roman Empire. However, he was also pragmatic about it. These people took their religion seriously, and to just announce one day that the empire is converting to Christianity would be akin to the President of the United States declaring that Islam is the new national religion.

The solution was to blend the traditional Mithra worship with Christianity. December 25th was Saturnalia (Sol Invictus Mithra). By decree it became “Jesus’ birthday.” Never mind the fact that there was no historical justification for it or that up to that point His birth had not been observed nor celebrated. Holly? That’s from the Druids. And so it goes...

What about the trappings we associate with Easter (a transliteration of “Ishtar” [look it up]). The rabbits and colored eggs we think are so cute (because we tend not to examine traditions critically) are actually pagan fertility symbols.

Now the most common response when I point out these facts to people is, “Yeah- well, we Christianized it.”

Christianized? Can anyone give me chapter and verse for that? Where are we authorized to take something of pagan origin, dress it up in “Christian” terms and symbols, then incorporate it into worship of our holy and righteous God? [crickets]

Rather, there are many warnings, cautions, and commands to avoid pagan things.

Theologically, I’m with the Reformers on matters of salvation & so forth. However, I am working toward tailoring the practice of my faith to reflect that of the First Century believers, before men started adopting pagan traditions into it. As I have found traditions or practices that originated in paganism, I have discarded them. It’s like weeding a garden.

I no longer celebrate Christmas. The Biblical holidays and festivals portrayed the Messiah, and I have been learning how to observe them from that perspective.

I’ve also thought about getting a sho’far, just to entertain the neighbors.

My goal is a First Century kind of faith.

People have never liked it when you tamper with their paradigms or traditions. The ancient Pharisees didn't, and the modern ones don't like it any better.
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 6:01:50 AM EDT
Amen! I dropped Xmas and Easter like lead bricks after I was converted. Xmas is not only pagan, it celebrates our Lord as a little human baby, when He is in actuality sitting at the right hand of the Father waiting for His enemies to be made a footstool for His feet. Quite a different picture.


The Biblical holidays and festivals portrayed the Messiah, and I have been learning how to observe them from that perspective.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Are you going to start observing Jewish holidays that were in anticipation of the Messiah? I believe this too would not be proper, as the Messiah has come and has accomplished what He intended to accomplish.

I believe there is only one "celebration" a Christian need participate in, and that is the Lord's supper.
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 6:06:35 AM EDT

Originally Posted By dramine:
I'm not sure what you mean by this. Are you going to start observing Jewish holidays that were in anticipation of the Messiah? I believe this too would not be proper, as the Messiah has come and has accomplished what He intended to accomplish.

I believe there is only one "celebration" a Christian need participate in, and that is the Lord's supper.



While they foretold His coming, they can also be used to teach of when He came. That's the purpose of a holiday, to bring events to remembrance.

As I believe the resurrection is one of the key events in history and is fundamental to the identity of Yeshua and our salvation in Him, I don't have a problem with observing "Resurrection Day", but I've stripped it of pagan trappings.

Here are a couple sources:

biblicalholidays.com/

I got a copy of this book. Very family-oriented:

www.homeschool-books.com/xcart/customer/product.php?productid=16479&cat=294&page=1&XCARTSESSID=7fc8d93c4c04987fa0bc28cea5d29cc6
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 6:16:50 AM EDT
Brohaw,

I understand what you're saying, but the Lord has not told us to do it. He told the Jews to do it, and only to look forward to the Messiah. We are to look forward to His Parousia, when we will be glorified and His enemies destroyed.

Each of the feasts and celebrations were fulfilled entirely in the person and work of Jesus Christ. In the same way that we would never think to begin sacrifices anew, we should also not begin festivals and feasts anew. They are accomplished and done away with. The Lord's supper is in remembrance of Christ's atoning death for us. "Do this in remembrance of Me".


Just my understanding, take it for what it's worth....
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 6:28:56 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/5/2005 9:02:25 AM EDT by VA-gunnut]
***Edited***<va-gunnut>


I have also tried to tailor my family's traditions towards a first-century kind of faith.

We celebrate "Easter", however ours is closer to a completed Passover. This kind of affects my view of the sacrement of communion. From my reading of the Word, we have but one of two ways to celebrate "The Lord's Supper": either at every meal where two are gathered, or once a year as a Passover Seder. I currently lean towards the latter, so that's how we celebrate Easter.

As far as Christmas, I refuse to be part of the Santa Claus/Yule Log/PhallusTree traditions. I'd love to have an alternative date based on truth, but in reality that would probably align my birthday with Jesus' (both fell on Yom Kippur, in my case I can confirm, in the case of a "true" date for Jesus' birth, it would be educated speculation). As an alternative, the wife and I exchange small gifts as a reminder, and celebrate His birthday on 12/25. Some would see that as a comprimise, I guess.

Bottom line: As you can probably tell from the ideas above (and the two other threads ), I lean heavily towards the traditions of Judaism when it comes to the "roots" of my Christan belief. The first century Church was considered a sect of Judaism, and while I reject the Levitical proscriptions and prohibitions (Acts 11:1-18, Romans 7:4-7), and hold strong to a doctrine of Grace (Ephesians 2:4-9), I also realize that the Gospel was meant for Jews first (Romans 1:16).
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 6:31:50 AM EDT
I see what you're saying.

Yeshua Himself observed these days, most notably the Passover. His coming was the fulfillment, as illustrated in Luke 4:

16He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. And he stood up to read. 17The scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written:
18"The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
because he has anointed me
to preach good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
and recovery of sight for the blind,
to release the oppressed,
19to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor."[e]

20Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him, 21and he began by saying to them, "Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing."


Yet He continued to observe the holidays that foretold His coming.

Also, these holidays can be a vivid teaching tool as we show their fulfillment in Him.

Within the context of Christian liberty, I can't say you're wrong and everybody should do as I do. According to Romans 14, we should each follow our conscience as guided by the Holy Spirit.



Link Posted: 8/5/2005 6:37:25 AM EDT

Originally Posted By FMD:
As an alternative, the wife and I exchange small gifts as a reminder, and celebrate His birthday on 12/25. Some would see that as a comprimise, I guess.




When I first tried to explain this to the extended family nobody understood or received what I was saying. This Christmas presents came anyway. Of course that leads to a feeling of being obligated to reciprocate...

What my wife and I decided was to prevent a lot of conflict, we would exchange gifts within the family, if only to reciprocate gift giving from others. It wouldn't matter if it was because of National Gift Day, Festivus, or Just Because We Love You.

A friend accused me of compromising, but I don't see it that way.

If on a given day my Mother sends me a gift and I send one to her, I don't see the harm in it.
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 9:12:40 AM EDT
I always find it so... disappointing.... when people dismiss beautiful tradition and ritual out of sheer ignorance.

I know that statement may ruffle some feathers but I might as well toss diplomacy out the window and be honest.

Tradition and ritual are important not because God requires it (God -requires- nothing), but because we do. It helps us to wrap our meger little minds around much larger concepts than we normally could. It helps our spirits, our souls, to... communicate... with out conscious minds. It helps us participate in the mystery, to bring it into our conscious minds.

Heck... The tradition and ritual is why I'm still Catholic.
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 9:16:30 AM EDT
I have never had a problem with local customes being adopted along side Christianity. It builds unity amongst the newer converts and shows respect for those people's past history.

SGat1r5
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 9:30:33 AM EDT



Experience supplies painful proof that traditions once called into being are first called useful, then they become necessary. At last they are too often made idols, and all must bow down to them or be punished. -J.C. Ryle


Tradition is one thing, but what about obedience?

When I ask a person if it is proper to obey God, the common reply is, “Yes.” Then when I point out specific principles He set forth that conflict with their opinions they respond with shrill cries of “Legalism!” Can we really have it both ways?

What should be our guide in considering such things? Our feelings? Our opinions? Or should Scripture be the rule?

Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. (Acts 17:11)

Consider this principle given by Yahweh to the Israelies:

When you enter the land the LORD your God is giving you, do not learn to imitate the detestable ways of the nations there… You must be blameless before the LORD your God. (Dt 18:9, 13 NIV).”

Here He warns the Israelites, and us, against learning the ways of the pagans, in essence, to keep themselves set apart and to not let themselves be contaminated by pagan traditions, customs, and beliefs. There was good reason why He became so angry at the Israelites bowing down to the golden calf in the wilderness.

Naturally this was not just for the Israelites thousands of years ago. Today, maybe even more than then, it is imperative to keep ungodly influences from contaminating our doctrine. So many non-Christian groups have adopted Christian terminology or even (mis)use the Bible itself, claiming to be the “true” church. The need for unadulterated doctrine is emphasized in James 1:27,

“Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world. (NIV)”

And, as Paul wrote to Timothy:

“Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers (1 Tim 4:16, NIV).”

Continuing in this vein, the concept of keeping the sheep and goats separated is expounded in II Cor 6:14-18,

Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said, “I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God and they will be my people.

“Therefore come out of them and be separate, says the LORD. Touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you. I will be a Father to you, and you will be my sons and daughters, says the LORD Almighty.”


Obviously this is referring to being vigilant against outside (pagan) influences creeping into the Church and polluting the pure faith. We are called to be set apart from the world and avoid being contaminated by it.

From these verses we can see that we have an obligation to our Creator and ourselves to carefully guard our doctrine. This consists of two parts. The first is to carefully evaluate spiritual teachings, incorporating what is true and rejecting the false. The second is to inventory what we have already adopted and evaluate it also according to our Scriptural reference.

It’s not an easy or comfortable thing to do, especially when you feel like that one voice crying out in the wilderness. People will tend to question your mental (not just spiritual!) state when you depart from the bounds of convention. However, when our Heavenly Father reveals truth to you there is a decision to be made.
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 9:33:51 AM EDT
My comments were not directed at the RCC specifically. Many Protestant churches fit the description above.

Also, when examining a tradition one should naturally consider the origins of it.

And I'm not talking about adopting cultural characteristics, like dress or language.

I'm talking about adopting elements of pagan (ungodly) religions into Christianity. That is the main point which I would like addressed.

Oh yes, being a scriptural authority kinda guy please provide chapter & verse references to support your opinions.
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 9:38:55 AM EDT

Originally Posted By sgtar15:
I have never had a problem with local customes being adopted along side Christianity. It builds unity amongst the newer converts and shows respect for those people's past history.

SGat1r5


It doesn't have anything to do with respect. It does involve past traditions giving way to the new. One example of this is an alternative interpretation of a Nativity scene. There you have the newborn savior, with the priests of Mithras and the symbols of Set and Osiris (the donkey and the ox), conceding their power to the new.

Christmas is not celebrated on December 25 because that was the day he was actually born. Nor is it to incorporate the followers of Mithras into Christianity.

It is because the coming of the Christ does the same thing that the coming of Mithras, Lord of Light, did. Mithras is said to have brought light into the world. Christ does the same thing. That date is chosen for both because it is the start of the lengthening of days; longer days... with more light. Hello? We seeing a connection here?

Old hero figures giving way to the new. That's all...
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 9:39:19 AM EDT

Originally Posted By sgtar15:
I have never had a problem with local customes being adopted along side Christianity. It builds unity amongst the newer converts and shows respect for those people's past history.

SGat1r5




You sure about that? Have you seen what some of the Curanderos have perverted Catholicism into?
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 10:00:17 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TexasSIG:

Originally Posted By sgtar15:
I have never had a problem with local customes being adopted along side Christianity. It builds unity amongst the newer converts and shows respect for those people's past history.

SGat1r5




You sure about that? Have you seen what some of the Curanderos have perverted Catholicism into?



I have seen what some christrian have done to the church. Is it similar?

Sgatr15
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 10:05:11 AM EDT

Originally Posted By sgtar15:

Originally Posted By TexasSIG:

Originally Posted By sgtar15:
I have never had a problem with local customes being adopted along side Christianity. It builds unity amongst the newer converts and shows respect for those people's past history.

SGat1r5




You sure about that? Have you seen what some of the Curanderos have perverted Catholicism into?



I have seen what some christrian have done to the church. Is it similar?

Sgatr15



You are the great Defender of Roman Catholics huh. You will ignore Curanderos and their
twisted acts because they even remotely consider themselves Catholic, but want
to wail into everyone else for anything that doesn't line up with edicts from Rome.

The topic was blending local customs into Christianity. Just because some wackjob
wants to dance with Rattlesnakes does not mean that activity was blended in from
local customs. That's 2 different stories.

I'd think you would be shocked at what goes on south of our border in relation to your Church,
but as long as they call themselves Catholic you are OK with it. Amazing.......
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 10:07:37 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TexasSIG:
I'd think you would be shocked at what goes on south of our border in relation to your Church,
but as long as they call themselves Catholic you are OK with it. Amazing.......



Only you brought Catholic into this discussion. I never did. And I never made the statemnt you claimed above either.

Sgtar15
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 10:09:40 AM EDT

Originally Posted By sgtar15:

Originally Posted By TexasSIG:
I'd think you would be shocked at what goes on south of our border in relation to your Church,
but as long as they call themselves Catholic you are OK with it. Amazing.......



Only you brought Catholic into this discussion. I never did. And I never made the statemnt you claimed above either.

Sgtar15



You said

I have never had a problem with local customes being adopted along side Christianity. It builds unity amongst the newer converts and shows respect for those people's past history.


I gave you a specific example that you should have a personal interest in, wondering if you'd seen what goes on down there, purely as discussion of this thread.

Everytime you see the word Catholic in a thread you think your Church is being attacked.
It's getting tiresome.
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 10:15:11 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TexasSIG:

I gave you a specific example that you should have a personal interest in, wondering if you'd seen what goes on down there, purely as discussion of this thread.



Okay, You posted an exception to the norm. Great..so what? There are plenty of exceptions to every norm.


Everytime you see the word Catholic in a thread you think your Church is being attacked.
It's getting tiresome.



Only because you took the oppurtunity to attck the Catholic Church..again. This topic had to do with Christianity. It was you that brought catholics into it and you did so only to try to make them look bad.

Why don't you stick to the topic and there will not be a problem.

Because I am sure that if I dig hard enough I can find plenty of other christian churches that also do things "wqrong" according to you and the Bible.

But I try not to do that because that would be focusing on the negative instead of the positive.

Please learn to show the same respect.

Sgat1r5
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 10:22:27 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TexasSIG:
The topic was blending local customs into Christianity.


Well.. That's a road that goes both ways. Christianity was an... evolution, if y'all will allow that term.

But it also happens that Christianity gets incorporated into other traditons. Think of all the Christian iconography which gets incorporated into Voo Doo, for example... or Wicca.. Neither of those is some perverted form of Christianity, but something preexisting which assimilated Christianity into it. Neither stopped being what it was.
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 10:30:00 AM EDT

Originally Posted By sgtar15:

Originally Posted By TexasSIG:

I gave you a specific example that you should have a personal interest in, wondering if you'd seen what goes on down there, purely as discussion of this thread.



Okay, You posted an exception to the norm. Great..so what? There are plenty of exceptions to every norm.


Everytime you see the word Catholic in a thread you think your Church is being attacked.
It's getting tiresome.



Only because you took the oppurtunity to attck the Catholic Church..again. This topic had to do with Christianity. It was you that brought catholics into it and you did so only to try to make them look bad.

Why don't you stick to the topic and there will not be a problem.

Because I am sure that if I dig hard enough I can find plenty of other christian churches that also do things "wqrong" according to you and the Bible.

But I try not to do that because that would be focusing on the negative instead of the positive.

Please learn to show the same respect.

Sgat1r5





If you can't take negative talk about your chosen religion, then you need to leave.
There is no way to talk about your chosen faith without disagreeing with someone elses.

Did you read the original post here? First line was "latent roots of Christianity"

You can't have a discussion about the roots of Chrisitanity without that involving
the Roman Catholic Church. If you can't stand the historical impact the Church
has had on Christianity, for good and bad, then maybe you shouldn't be in the
religion forum.

This is not about what other churches may or may not have done.
This discussion started about the bringing of pagan topics and traditions into
Christianity. Roman Catholicism has spred through out the world, and it's
only natural that peopel will take their local customs and integrate it.

No one put down Catholicism, I merely asked you if you were familiar with
some things that were relevent to this discussion, and you take everything
with Catholic in it as an insult.

As for focusing on the positive, as a Christian I don't find that integrating pagan
rituals with Chrisitan doctrine is a positive thing at all.

Brohawk has given some pretty interesting examples. He also is talking
about cautions, warnings etc to avoid pagan things.

For the discussion at hand, I'm talking about a real world CURRENT example of where
pagan rituals are being integrated into Christianity, in Mexicoa and South America, by people called
Curanderos, or faith-healers. That these folks happen to have been converted
to Christianity by Roman Catholics from Spain is a historical sidenote, but one I thought you might
be interested in, since it's CURRENT, and TIMELY. But you don't want to do that.

So, don't participate in this discussion, that's fine, but like I said, you are not going
to avoid discussions involving Rome, because of the deep historical connection.

Some things about it will be positive, some negative, that's called history.
It's not a personal attack on you or your Church, but you have to recognize
the impact that Church has had on Christianity, for good in most cases, and
bad in some. In this particular case the Spanish allowed for the integration
of some local rituals and it has gone extreme in some cases that still exist today.

I told you in a thread the other day I respect the Church of Rome except for 2 aspects,
you can go read that if you haven't already.

Link Posted: 8/5/2005 10:35:59 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TexasSIG:


This is not about what other churches may or may not have done.
This discussion started about the bringing of pagan topics and traditions into
Christianity.


Yeah.. but I've pretty much already covered how and why that happens and it has nothing to do with anything "pagan".. well, yeah it does but not in the way you think.
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 10:37:16 AM EDT

Originally Posted By hydgirl:

But it also happens that Christianity gets incorporated into other traditons. Think of all the Christian iconography which gets incorporated into Voo Doo, for example... or Wicca.. Neither of those is some perverted form of Christianity, but something preexisting which assimilated Christianity into it. Neither stopped being what it was.



I'll disagree with you there (No surprise! )

When you mix something with Christianity it is diminished.

A parable:

One day a mother baked some brownies for her children. They smelled sooooooooo good and the kids couldn't wait to dig in.

She took them from the oven, let them cool a bit, then cut them & stacked them on a plate.

The anticipation grew as she carried the plate to the table.

Just before the kids reached for them she said, "There's just one thing I want you to know. I put some dog poop in the brownie mix."

Their faces were a mix of disappointment and disgust.

Mom said, "But don't worry- I'm sure they'll be fine. It was just a teeny tiny bit. Go ahead and dig in."

Silly story, but it illustrates the point, as Paul wrote to Timothy:

“Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers (1 Tim 4:16, NIV).”


Link Posted: 8/5/2005 10:43:45 AM EDT

Originally Posted By hydgirl:

Originally Posted By TexasSIG:


This is not about what other churches may or may not have done.
This discussion started about the bringing of pagan topics and traditions into
Christianity.


Yeah.. but I've pretty much already covered how and why that happens and it has nothing to do with anything "pagan".. well, yeah it does but not in the way you think.



Yes, you did talk about it. But if you ask a Wiccan what they are, they will answer Wiccan.

If you ask a Curandero what they are, in most cases it's Catholic. They attend mass, etc.
So in that instance it is not that the Pagan ritual absorbed Christianity, it's the other way
around. So it does still happen in both directions I suppose.
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 10:48:48 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Brohawk:

Originally Posted By hydgirl:

But it also happens that Christianity gets incorporated into other traditons. Think of all the Christian iconography which gets incorporated into Voo Doo, for example... or Wicca.. Neither of those is some perverted form of Christianity, but something preexisting which assimilated Christianity into it. Neither stopped being what it was.



I'll disagree with you there (No surprise! )

When you mix something with Christianity it is diminished.

A parable:

One day a mother baked some brownies for her children. They smelled sooooooooo good and the kids couldn't wait to dig in.

She took them from the oven, let them cool a bit, then cut them & stacked them on a plate.

The anticipation grew as she carried the plate to the table.

Just before the kids reached for them she said, "There's just one thing I want you to know. I put some dog poop in the brownie mix."

Their faces were a mix of disappointment and disgust.

Mom said, "But don't worry- I'm sure they'll be fine. It was just a teeny tiny bit. Go ahead and dig in."

Silly story, but it illustrates the point, as Paul wrote to Timothy:

“Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers (1 Tim 4:16, NIV).”




I'm sure those that practice Voo Doo, or Wicca... or anything else for that matter.. wouldn't appreciate their tradition being compared to dog poop, but that is niether here nor there. And your analogy is inaccurate. In the examples I cited, the brownie would be the existing tradition and Christianity would be the dog poop. But that doesn't matter, either.
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 10:56:41 AM EDT

Originally Posted By hydgirl:
I'm sure those that practice Voo Doo, or Wicca... or anything else for that matter.. wouldn't appreciate their tradition being compared to dog poop, but that is niether here nor there. And your analogy is inaccurate. In the examples I cited, the brownie would be the existing tradition and Christianity would be the dog poop. But that doesn't matter, either.



It was an illustration of something that made the brownies other than what they appeared to be and should be.

The poop could just as easily represent "worldy ways", such as drinking to excess and extra-marital sex.

And one thing I've noticed is that you tend to retreat to a position of "It doesn't matter", like in the past when we've debated whether the resurrection actually happened. When I've presented my reasoning, your reply was "It doesn't matter if it's true or not."

My friend, all of this does matter.
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 11:35:01 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Brohawk:

Originally Posted By hydgirl:
I'm sure those that practice Voo Doo, or Wicca... or anything else for that matter.. wouldn't appreciate their tradition being compared to dog poop, but that is niether here nor there. And your analogy is inaccurate. In the examples I cited, the brownie would be the existing tradition and Christianity would be the dog poop. But that doesn't matter, either.



It was an illustration of something that made the brownies other than what they appeared to be and should be.

The poop could just as easily represent "worldy ways", such as drinking to excess and extra-marital sex.

And one thing I've noticed is that you tend to retreat to a position of "It doesn't matter", like in the past when we've debated whether the resurrection actually happened. When I've presented my reasoning, your reply was "It doesn't matter if it's true or not."

My friend, all of this does matter.


In all actuality, the "it doesn't matter whether or not the Ressurection occured" was my point entirely... not a retreat, although I can see how you'd get confused. But I'm not going to hijack this thread with a Ressurection debate.
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 12:43:13 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/5/2005 12:49:25 PM EDT by sgtar15]

Originally Posted By TexasSIG:



If you can't take negative talk about your chosen religion, then you need to leave.
There is no way to talk about your chosen faith without disagreeing with someone elses.



All I did was ask you a question about who they were.


Did you read the original post here? First line was "latent roots of Christianity"

You can't have a discussion about the roots of Chrisitanity without that involving
the Roman Catholic Church.



True, because the Catholic Church was there first.



If you can't stand the historical impact the Church
has had on Christianity, for good and bad, then maybe you shouldn't be in the
religion forum.



This was what I asked if you scroll above



Originally Posted By TexasSIG:

Originally Posted By sgtar15:
I have never had a problem with local customes being adopted along side Christianity. It builds unity amongst the newer converts and shows respect for those people's past history.

SGat1r5




You sure about that? Have you seen what some of the Curanderos have perverted Catholicism into?



I have seen what some christrian have done to the church. Is it similar?

Sgatr15



So are you against me asking questions about my own church?




No one put down Catholicism, I merely asked you if you were familiar with
some things that were relevent to this discussion, and you take everything
with Catholic in it as an insult.



Maybe highlighting it would help...

I have seen what some christrian have done to the church. Is it similar?

Sgatr15



As for focusing on the positive, as a Christian I don't find that integrating pagan
rituals with Chrisitan doctrine is a positive thing at all.





You should have stated that.





For the discussion at hand, I'm talking about a real world CURRENT example of where
pagan rituals are being integrated into Christianity, in Mexicoa and South America, by people called
Curanderos, or faith-healers. That these folks happen to have been converted
to Christianity by Roman Catholics from Spain is a historical sidenote, but one I thought you might
be interested in, since it's CURRENT, and TIMELY. But you don't want to do that.



Let's try highlighted with an increased font.

I have seen what some christrian have done to the church. Is it similar?

Sgatr15


Now that you FINALLY answered my question I will say thank you. It took you awhile.

Those people down south sound crazy to me down there, but then again alot of southerners sound crazy to me. And just because someone calls themselves a catholic does mean they are a good one. Look at Kennedy and Kerry as examples. Same applies to people that say they are a Christian doesn't mean they are one.



So, don't participate in this discussion, that's fine, but like I said, you are not going
to avoid discussions involving Rome, because of the deep historical connection.



It was your tturn..and you took awhile to answer the question so I had to wait.



I told you in a thread the other day I respect the Church of Rome except for 2 aspects,
you can go read that if you haven't already.



You say alot about Rome and what you think they believe and how you think they have acted and why, for what reason and what not! I mean damn! You know my church history better than I do and yyou are even a more masterful speaker and presenter of the facts of my own religion.

You sir are a catholic preacher!!!!!!



But if only you could learn to say what YOU represent instead of what you think others churches and church members represent. That's when it becomes a testament...other than that it's just some guy talking


Sgat15
Link Posted: 8/5/2005 12:45:09 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Brohawk:

Mom said, "But don't worry- I'm sure they'll be fine. It was just a teeny tiny bit. Go ahead and dig in."






Jesus would break the brownies, multiply them, and feed the neighborhood.

Sgat1r5
Link Posted: 8/6/2005 8:00:11 AM EDT

Originally Posted By sgtar15:

But if only you could learn to say what YOU represent instead of what you think others churches and church members represent. That's when it becomes a testament...other than that it's just some guy talking


Sgat15



A big chunk of what you say is correct, so I'll try to watch it in the future.
Link Posted: 8/6/2005 9:52:37 AM EDT
Brohawk brings up a very important and timely subject here, and you guys turn it into a pissing match between the pot and the kettle.

If nobody minds, could we get back to the topic at hand, and dispense with the poo-flinging?


Signed,

iron (black) skillet.

Top Top