What I genuinely get Amusement out of is how often and it's actually fairly often that Protestants come up with something that's quote-unquote new but is actually an ancient practice. For example the rediscovery of ancient writers on Christianity as actually having relevance for today.
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
CIVIL RELIGIOUS DISCUSSION: All things Christianity
- Thread starter PaulF
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
- Status
What I genuinely get Amusement out of is how often and it's actually fairly often that Protestants come up with something that's quote-unquote new but is actually an ancient practice. For example the rediscovery of ancient writers on Christianity as actually having relevance for today.
Because you're different and it's easier to bash than understand.
Did I just Denny this thread?
Does an obelisk become a good phallic symbol if you stick a cross on top of it?
Does a vesica piscis become Christian imagery if you put a goddess image in it?
And then how about when an obelisk is inserted into a vesica piscis?
Yeah man, that must be like really really Christian.
Or put a tail on it and call it a fish.
Churches, their rules, their ways of doing things... they're all goofy because they're all people.
Arguing about is a lot of fun sometimes but it sho ain't going to help us do what Jesus said.
Does a vesica piscis become Christian imagery if you put a goddess image in it?
And then how about when an obelisk is inserted into a vesica piscis?
Yeah man, that must be like really really Christian.
Or put a tail on it and call it a fish.
Churches, their rules, their ways of doing things... they're all goofy because they're all people.
Arguing about is a lot of fun sometimes but it sho ain't going to help us do what Jesus said.
It is not uncommon for the true faith and the most useful information relating to it to be marginalized and hidden away from the general population of the religious. Look at the reign of Josiah, one of the finest kings of Judah since David, who ruled for about 10 years before he rediscovered the Book of the Law in the crumbling Temple.
Protestant theology has not abandoned the Church Fathers, writers like Augustine, or the practice of using Confessions of Faith (like the 1689 Baptist Confession) and related catechisms. To classify the average American or European church as "Protestant" in the same fashion as Luther, Zwingli, Calvin etc is inaccurate. I'm not sure what term to create to codify it, but the utter watering down of real Biblical practice and concern for Christ and His actual Gospel leads me more towards "Laodiceanism" as an appropriate title.
I disagree - with both assertions.
Arguing about it isn't fun. Discussing it, and exploring it, is. IMHO.
And, it absolutely can help us do what Jesus told us to do, by making it more concrete. We can learn from each other how to better follow Him.
Wherever 2 or more are gathered in His name....
There seems to be a dichotomy of forgiveness herein. One branch seems interpersonal forgiveness, with the other being the Lord's forgiveness
If you commit adultery, and your wife forgives you, has your sin been forgiven?
Your interpretation seems to be reading into the text. The plain reading is a sin is committed against me, that act is a sin, therefore I am forgiving another person's sin against me and furthermore unless I do, I will not be forgiven my sin.
Your interpretation also leads into what I discussed earlier about the tendency to ignore the horizontal relationship that the verses are implying because I would suggest the proper way to ask your question is this:
If I commit adultery and my wife does not forgive me, are her sins forgiven?
Agreed.
I would argue no, your sin is not forgiven. Sin is an offense against God. Your wife (in this fictional scenario) can forgive the offenses levied against her, but she has no authority to speak for God or the offenses committed against Him.
The direction my thought is taking (and surely it will showcase my ignorance of the fine-grained details of RCC/Orthodox) is when you say “Forgive me father (or ‘Bless me father) for I have sinned ...” which father are you talking to - the holy one or the one in the booth. When the one in the booth is also the one levying penance, there seems potential for a pitfall
Always better to have real ignorance than false knowledge.
Just as the verses suggest and TLex alluded to, the priest is acting in place of the church or in your example as the spouse who sinned against in your example.
There is a notion in the west of sin as a transgression against God as a primary definition. PaulF's post is an example of that.
In the east, sin is simply missing the mark. We are not living up to our calling and this divides us not only from God but also each other. However if we are truly spiritually advanced we will see these two things as one. You are created in the image of God and are called to grow into His likeness. Sin is a disease in need of healing that mars the image of God in every person. The true Christian can see that image of God in everyone he/she meets and cultivates the growth of that person into the likeness of Christ. So for any sin, there is nothing personal about it. It breaks communion with God and each other yet mystically these are the same. Christ is the head of the body and each of us are members. A wound to the body is a wound to all members.
Just as the verses suggest and TLex alluded to, the priest is acting in place of the church or in your example as the spouse who sinned against in your example.
There is a notion in the west of sin as a transgression against God as a primary definition. PaulF's post is an example of that.
In the east, sin is simply missing the mark. We are not living up to our calling and this divides us not only from God but also each other. However if we are truly spiritually advanced we will see these two things as one. You are created in the image of God and are called to grow into His likeness. Sin is a disease in need of healing that mars the image of God in every person. The true Christian can see that image of God in everyone he/she meets and cultivates the growth of that person into the likeness of Christ. So for any sin, there is nothing personal about it. It breaks communion with God and each other yet mystically these are the same. Christ is the head of the body and each of us are members. A wound to the body is a wound to all members.
There are studies that show psychological therapy is, for many things, as effective as pharmacological mitigation. (We don't truly understand yet how the brain works when it comes to things like depression.)
Talking to someone about sensitive issues - particularly things one might feel guilty about - has a connective quality. It brings those people closer together. Alone, someone can rationalize or compartmentalize, or just suppress feelings. But by expressing them, they are better able to move past what may be holding them back. That connection among the people can extend beyond those 2, to the broader community. If everyone is confessing their sins, then there's no stigma to doing so.
I believe that the biblical suggestion (at least) of confession/reconciliation with another person is the better practice. Almost as if the person giving the instruction kinda knew what was going on.
Again, this isn't dogma, just my own view at a practical level.
Talking to someone about sensitive issues - particularly things one might feel guilty about - has a connective quality. It brings those people closer together. Alone, someone can rationalize or compartmentalize, or just suppress feelings. But by expressing them, they are better able to move past what may be holding them back. That connection among the people can extend beyond those 2, to the broader community. If everyone is confessing their sins, then there's no stigma to doing so.
I believe that the biblical suggestion (at least) of confession/reconciliation with another person is the better practice. Almost as if the person giving the instruction kinda knew what was going on.
Again, this isn't dogma, just my own view at a practical level.
The Church is way ahead of Science in this area 
There are studies that show psychological therapy is, for many things, as effective as pharmacological mitigation. (We don't truly understand yet how the brain works when it comes to things like depression.)
Talking to someone about sensitive issues - particularly things one might feel guilty about - has a connective quality. It brings those people closer together. Alone, someone can rationalize or compartmentalize, or just suppress feelings. But by expressing them, they are better able to move past what may be holding them back. That connection among the people can extend beyond those 2, to the broader community. If everyone is confessing their sins, then there's no stigma to doing so.
I believe that the biblical suggestion (at least) of confession/reconciliation with another person is the better practice. Almost as if the person giving the instruction kinda knew what was going on.
Again, this isn't dogma, just my own view at a practical level.
A question, if I may. When explaining confession, I've seen some RC sources point to Matthew 18:18 with regard to priests having apostolic authority. "...whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." God forgives, but if the priest is determining what is bound and what is loosed, isn't he making the decision on what is to be forgiven on God's behalf? Pardon the dumb analogy, but it makes it sound like God's forgiveness is water coming out of a fire hose and the priests are deciding where to point it.
I disagree - with both assertions.
Arguing about it isn't fun. Discussing it, and exploring it, is. IMHO.
And, it absolutely can help us do what Jesus told us to do, by making it more concrete. We can learn from each other how to better follow Him.
Wherever 2 or more are gathered in His name....
If you gather to pray for guidance, wisdom and direction, that works. If you admonish each other to better behavior or towards better implementation of His directions to us, yeah. If you get together and bounce ideas off one another to come up with something that sounds cool... well, that's another place churches go off the rails (i.e., goofy). Better we should look at Rev.2 and see how those went goofy. All of which doesn't mean I'm not just being goofy trying to discuss this.
Meanwhile, I'm rather fascinated with the symbolism adopted by many, pre-Christian, Christian and anti-Christian. The vesica piscis is used by many as the entrance into the physical, the joining of the spirit world with the physical (It's not just Mastercard!
). It's even in the logo of a hotel chain with a flame within (the light bearer) and hair around it (could call it rays of light if you wanted to). It's in front of the Vatican with a phallic symbol sticking up it. The adoption of symbols, the explanations given on the surface and the reasons actually behind their adoption are often rewarding studies that reveal much. That overlap of worlds... I'm beginning to suspect that the part about being born of water takes us right back to the separation in Genesis 1 where the already existing world was being retrofitted but that's a whole 'nother story.
No apology necessary - partly because I think I may borrow that analogy.
In fact, I think it could prove useful here.Think of a hot summer day and people lined up by the fire hose who want to cool off. The priest is holding the hose and willing to help make comfortable anyone who gets in line. In fact, they are obligated to do that. People are free to get in line or not, and can decide how much water they get.
As I recall, priests are allowed (in the RCC tradition) an evaluation of contrition. That is, if someone wants the sacrament of reconciliation, but is unrepentant, then it can be denied. I'm REALLY not sure how that would play out. People are faulty, and tend to be tempted by the same things over and over. That doesn't mean they lack contrition, that just means they are flawed.
Personally, I've never known something like that to happen.
I think it can also occur in a situation where someone refuses to do penance for the sins, because then their choices are preventing the efficacy of the sacrament. For instance, if someone confesses to murder, and the priest tells them to turn themselves in, but they refuse... that doesn't actually seem like repentance.
That has always interested me, too, along with other... let's say... "political" decisions made by the Church at various times.Meanwhile, I'm rather fascinated with the symbolism adopted by many, pre-Christian, Christian and anti-Christian. The vesica piscis is used by many as the entrance into the physical, the joining of the spirit world with the physical (It's not just Mastercard!
That overlap of worlds... I'm beginning to suspect that the part about being born of water takes us right back to the separation in Genesis 1 where the already existing world was being retrofitted but that's a whole 'nother story.
Particularly with regard to symbology, I think there's 2 basic approaches that are kinda mutually exclusive (and I usually hate being arbitrarily binary):
- That Christianity co-opted the local symbology as a brazen marketing tactic to get more followers. Like ancient click bait.
- The Holy Spirit works in ways beyond our understanding, so the prior symbology may have been God's handiwork preparing for the arrival of the Christian message.
Now, to maintain consistency with my personal fondness for gray areas, any particular symbol or native habit may have been either of those. However, I tend to align more with the latter view.
Forgivness - so hard for man to wrap their arms around; yet so vital in so many ways; results that can change our eternity.
So, I walk into the confessional and share my sins to a man behind the screen. He tells me not to sin again and tells me to say 10 Our Fathers and 5 hail mary's. I leave the penalty box and go sit on the bench. I begin my random penalty and midway - I remember I will be late for my appointment. Run out of church thinking, "to be continued".
Are my sins forgiven? If so, at which point? If not, why? Do I need to finish my "works" to be forgiven? Is this one of those "church traditions" or is it biblical?
So, I walk into the confessional and share my sins to a man behind the screen. He tells me not to sin again and tells me to say 10 Our Fathers and 5 hail mary's. I leave the penalty box and go sit on the bench. I begin my random penalty and midway - I remember I will be late for my appointment. Run out of church thinking, "to be continued".
Are my sins forgiven? If so, at which point? If not, why? Do I need to finish my "works" to be forgiven? Is this one of those "church traditions" or is it biblical?
- Status
Site Supporter
Staff online
-
GodFearinGunTotinSuper Moderator -
Cameramonkeywww.thechosen.tv -
d.kaufmanStill Here
Members online
- Fallschirmjaeger
- GodFearinGunTotin
- DaveO
- jspy5
- rbhargan
- barber613
- red_zr24x4
- Bosshoss
- JamesV
- jrb1980
- Cameramonkey
- harmonyaudio
- NyleRN
- Taurus the turtle
- AlienRayGun
- DeadeyeChrista'sdad
- d.kaufman
- Yamadog35
- KittySlayer
- jamil
- opus1776
- ancjr
- indyblue
- 45sRfun
- dekeshooter
- Sc1873
- z0mb13_m0nk3y
- thedreamer
- MAG58
- DoggyDaddy
- ColdSteel223
- OneBadV8
- ISP 5353
- Brandon
- Horsetrader
- funkeecowboy
- bmbutch
- BigMoose
- KJQ6945
- Ranger Rick
- littletommy
- Dean C.
- ComeJesuscome
- 2tonic
- STFU
- Hawkeye7br
- Thomas1969
- wesnellans
- hoosierdaddy1976
- yetti462