What is your denomination?

Ok, perhaps my example wasn't the best, and we shouldn't be name calling and making wild generalizations, but my point is that we have to make judgements about the here and now, and what we are going to do and who we are around. You can judge a drug dealer to be someone you shouldn't hang out with, but you shouldn't judge that person to never-ending torment in Hell.

 

I am a Buddhist, of the Karma Kagyu school, as taught in Amerika by the Vidyadhara, Chogyam Trungpa, Rinpoche. In particular, I am a member of the Dorje Kasung, the Vajra Guard.

All the sectarianism in this thread is quite disappointing. I see very little tolerance for others' religious beliefs. I also would like to commend those who are reminding these Christian extremists of their own religion's teachings.
The foundation of religious extremism is when religious dogma, such as a particular book, is placed ahead of one's personal spirituality.

I, personally, think that all religions can be good, if not interpreted too literally or dogmatically. However, all religions can be corrupted, and turned to extremism or other bad ends.

OZK, I'm not sure why you chose this thread to make a political flame against liberals and the left. What version of Amerikan history were you taught? Because you seem to have some details wrong...
I also don't see why TPMrules23's particular political persuasion is on trial here... everyone has a right to their political beliefs.

As for Wicca, witchcraft, etc. if anyone actually practices witchcraft or sorcery, AND it works, please tell me about it, how it works, etc.

 

eaglejedi, please don't ask that question. Sorcery helps no one, but only gives "self" power. Anytime any one person gets too power hungry, whether it be politically, physically, or spiritually, they usually go insane. Don't mess with magic.


To answer the question of this thread, I like to think of myself as a Christian. Nothing more, nothing less. I am currently attending a Southern Baptist church, however.

 

All right, I'll agree to that, Coolguy.

 

I wouldn't worry about black magic, 201. If anyone's ever transformed, or possessed someone's mind, or fired Palpatine-style force lightning, then my name is Elvis Presley.

 

You can judge a drug dealer to be someone you shouldn't hang out with, but you shouldn't judge that person to never-ending torment in Hell.

That's probably a good way to put it.

 

Well, we shouldn't judge that person to hell, because like him, we have commited evil in some form.


But God should judge him to hell, because God hasn't comitted evil, but is totally oppsed to it.

 

Agnostic now that i have grown up and have my own beleifs.

 

"Not True. The ONLY Church that can trace itself back to Jesus and His disciples, is the Eastern Orthodox Church. The Catholic church split from the Orthodox Church."

Oh.... now that just isn't true. The Roman Catholic Church excommunicated the Eastern Church, and they in turn excommunicated the Roman Church, thus, they excommunicated each other. They split apart; one did not split from the other. FURTHERMORE, the Eastern Church traces its roots back to ANDREW, not to Peter, as the Roman Catholic Church does. Your statement is simply untrue.

 

You excommunicated each other, and your popes excommunicated each other, so all of you are excommunicated. That means that there is no true church of Christ on the earth, unless Jesus came and restablished His church and His priesthood.

 

Fact of the matter is religions whether they be Catholic, Eastern O., Buddhist, Hindu, Taoist, Wiccan, etc. are man made and thus falwed and imperfect.

 

"As for Wicca, witchcraft, etc. if anyone actually practices witchcraft or sorcery, AND it works, please tell me about it, how it works, etc."

Please read my post on the previous page. And don't confuse Wicca with Witchcraft and don't confuse either with sorcery.

"Don't mess with magic."
Well magic spelled that way generally refers to stage magic. If you mean the Magick and Witches practice than I've already stated that all it is is elaborate prayer.

 

Fact of the matter is religions whether they be Catholic, Eastern O., Buddhist, Hindu, Taoist, Wiccan, etc. are man made and thus falwed and imperfect.


In a weird way I think I'd agree with you on that 100%.

 

Roman Catholic. It is the only Church founded by Jesus Christ Himself (see Matthew 16: 18, 19). There can be no "Christian first, denomination second" argument, since Jesus told his Apostles that "he who rejects you [the Apostles] rejects Me.", and the only true succesors of the Apostles, both Sacramentally and Historically, are the Pope and Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church. There you have it brothers! Pax Christi Sit Semper Vobiscum.

 

Your right in one way, but there is a flaw in your argument. The apostles died before they could ordain new apostles. The pope had no athority to make new popes or bishops, they needed the apostles. Us Mormons belive that Christ himself came to Joseph Smith and told him to reestablish His Church. You may disagree with us that he did do that, but if he did, then surly you can see how we belive how we do.

 

I see a problem with both of your statements. You put too much emphasis on the church. Our God is not the body of believers down here and the way they worship, but on God Himself in heaven. If Jesus were to come once again to a people, Coolguy, don't you think it would be the Jews, as He did the first time? And if not, why would He reveal Himself to one man?


As for Catholicism, That has a whole lot o' pagan beliefs thrown in there, and so much is about tradition and cerimony. It's those two very things that Jesus oposed. What makes the Pope any different than the Pharisees(whom Jesus had to remind time and time again that they weren't as righteous as they claimed)?


No offense to either of you, but since you both think you are the one true church, and very "quietly"(for lack of a better word) took a jab at all other forms of Christianity, I just wanted to remind you that anyone who accepts Jesus as the sacrificial Lamb foretold in the OT, and follows Him, has an inheritance in God's kingdom.

 

I have said it before, and I will say it again. I belive that my church is the only true one. I think that every religion has the truth in it, just not the whole truth. If you follow Christ and his teachings, you will eventually (in this life or the next) be lead to the one true Church.

The Lord came to him because he prayed. He prayed because he read this passage in James 1:5-6.

5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
6 But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed.

This means that anyone can ask of the Lord which church is true. I don't know why he didn't go to the Jews because I haven't studied as much as I should, but I think it is because they rejected Him or something. I must admit my ignorance on this.

 

"Tradition" within the Catholic Church is not tradition as we usually understand it, like a bunch of acts, festivities or other stuff, but rather a GROUP OF TEACHINGS which constitutes part of the Depositum Fidei or Deposit of Faith. The Roman Catholic Tradition can be traced back to the Apostles themselves and the Holy Fathers of early Christendom and since it predates even the books of the New Testament, it was for a time the ONLY Depositum Fidei, thus ensuring that what was taught through which now is known as Tradition was Infallibly Inspired by the Holy Spirit.

As relates to Ceremony, I'm afraid that all of us Catholics are in part to blame for degenerating the participation in Holy Ceremonies such as, especially, Holy Mass, into nothing more than a social event or conventionalism. Such ceremonies are truly acts of Devotion and moments of deep dialogue with God, both personal and collective. For example, the readings from Holy Mass are esentially Trinitarian in that we hear the Word of God the Father in the Old Testament, the life and teachings of God the Son in the Gospel and in the Responsorial Psalm praise God through God the Holy Spirit, who inspired the Bible. And, THE most important part of Holy Mass is the Consecration and Communion, in which the bread and wine TRULY become the Body and Blood of Christ, NOT SYMBOLICALLY, but by virtue of the words that the priest pronounces "...THIS IS MY BODY, WHICH WILL BE GIVEN UP FOR YOU...", since the priest has been given such powers as part of his ministry, and acts In Nomine et Personae Christi, in The Name and Person of Christ. When Jesus said "do this in memory of Me", he did not mean symbollicaly, but rather that it is not the priest who consecrates, but Christ Himself through the ordained priest's words.

Also, it is true that God forbade the jews in the Old Testament to construct luxurious temples, but only because at that time the jews were impressionable nomads who could deter from the worship of the true God and believe they were worshipping the luxury of buildings and stuff. However, later He accepted the sacrifices from Solomon's Temple, and Jesus himself said that God allowed and forbade some things to the Jews which would be changed in His New and Everlasting Covenant, "because of the hardness of your hearts; but in the beginning it was not so." (Matthew 19:8), and even in the days of the Jewish High Priest Melchisedec, (who, BTW, offered bread and wine, symbolic of the future institution of the Eucharist!), we see that God is quite rigurous about the way in which sacrifice and worship are to be made, so what you refer to as "Ceremony" is not really a vague and needless thing, but really part of the respect and tribute we pay to God. What happens is that we either don't believe enough to even care about i,t or don't wish to know and treat God well enough so that we don't see the inner, spiritual fruits and richness of Religious Ceremonies.

As far as the Pope goes, what makes him different from pharisees is that Jesus himself wished him to be the shepherd of His flock on earth, and prayed to God the Father so that "his faith would not falter", and gave him power to legislate divine matters on earth ("the keys to the Kingdom."). So, if the Pope were to teach error, and God Himself (as the second person of the Most Holy Trinity, Jesus Christ) wants us to obey the Pope, then God himself would be responisble for our damnation, which is absurd and repugnant. The infallibility of the Pope only applies when he addresses the totality of the Universal Church, God's People, about faith and morality and other spiritual matter. Of course he IS human and subject to PERSONAL error and sin, but is guarded from mistake in all matters directly referring to his leadership of God's Church by the Holy Spirit. As far as the "bad Popes" go, (and there have, sadly, been many throughout history), never has any such Pope been so "bad" as to change or alter any articles of faith or morality, no matter how faithless or immoral he was in his completely fallible private life

 

Wow, nice post.


I disagree with a few things, but this isn't the place to discuss them, so I'll just leave them be.

 

...Denomination? Denomination? I don't HAVE a denomination. I am a non-denominational Christian, and if you think that that's laughable, it's not and I'll tell you why:

Denomination means dividing. In this case, dividing of the Church into different sects: Catholic, Baptist, Methodist, Lutheran, etc...

Now, I have been a non-denominational charasmatic Christian for basically...well, almost all of my life, and I would be nothing else. But it was only a few months ago that I happened upon this verse (I think God pointed it to me) in the Bible:

I Corinthians 1:10

"Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgement."

Now, I'm not saying that if you belong to a denomination, that you are going to Hell. To go to Heaven, all you have to do is except Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior and believe that he died on the cross for our sins and rose again, and obey God's commandments, etc, etc.

I'm just saying that denominational people are really missing out on what God has to offer, and if anyone here doesn't like that... I'm sorry.

I am against doctrine. The Bible is NOT doctrine, the Bible is GOD'S WORD. Doctrine is what MAN has written over the years through his "interpretations" of the Bible. Allow me to elaborate:

DOCTRINE says that you should just dress nice and go to Church to be saved.

DOCTRINE says that you have to say (just using an example) five Hail Marys and ten Our Fathers to be forgiven by God and be saved.

DOCTRINE says that do "this and that" to be saved.

THE BIBLE says "whomsoever shall call upon the name of Lord shall be saved"

If you ask me, what the BIBLE says is a lot simpler than some of things that some religions make you do.

And another thing: Christianity should not be considered a religion, it should be considered a faith. You can become a SLAVE to "religion," but a faith... You really have more freedom.

 

"And another thing: Christianity should not be considered a religion, it should be considered a faith. You can become a SLAVE to "religion," but a faith... You really have more freedom."



Exactly.

 

Denominations are a way for like-minded Christians on certain issues to be able to band together and worship without constantly running into arguments over methods.

For example, let's take baptism. There are two main ways (at least to my knowledge) to baptism someone: by sprinkling water upon his head or by completely immersing someone in a pool of water. Now, this isn't to say that one method is better than the other. As I understand it, tradition holds that most people who are sprinkled in their baptism are infants for the obvious reason of avoiding drowning the child. And, reasonably, traditionally older children and adults are immersed. Now, is this to say that one method is more holy than the other? Not really. The differences essentially arose out of necessity. Many people, when the infant mortality rate was much higher than it is today, wanted their children baptized as quickly as possible, so the infant didn't die without that ceremony and consequently go to Hell. Although by Presbyterian tradition, I was baptized as an infant via sprinkling, that doesn't make me think that's the one true and only way to be correctly baptized. It's a matter of personal prefence. As long as the spirit behind the baptism is maintained, the method is rather arbitrary.

I guess that's my wordy way of saying different doctrines are fine by me as long as the fundamentals that Christ dictated are fulfilled, i.e. you must believe his is Lord and Savior, and his death upon the cross allows humans to have enternal life. If you are a Christian and act like one, whether or not you believe in sprinkling or immersing, then in my opinion you are still a Christian. I may not agree with in your doctrine, but I will still respect you as a fellow brother or sister in Christ. I hope you'd do the same for me.

 

pentecostal/non-denominational?/charismatic

i sum it up with christian!

 

Christ was a example. His example showed us that immersion is only way it can be done. One must also have the POWER to babtize. I think that you should know what you are doing when you get babtized, and it is a choice. I don't think that babies can make that choice.

 

Baptizm is just a sign of the batizm of the Holy Spirit that Jesus does. Him being batized in water was simply to show us that He would baptize with the Holy Spirit. However, it's a good thing to be baptized simply to show others the commitment you've made to God.


But water only cleanses the flesh. The Holy Spirit cleanses our hearts.