NationStates Jolt Archive

Okay, so there's a lot of argument about Christianity on this board. At least you're using original argument (for me, anyway) and not the old, "How come Christianity has sparked off loads of wars and stuff?"

This thread isn't an argument thread. This is for people who actually want to find out more about Christianity and are interested in what it means. If you're not interested then you don't have to read on. I accept this. If you're just here to argue, go away.

Okay, so if you have any questions about Christianity that you'd like answering by, for example, other Christians, then just post here and I or any other Christian around will try to answer them. Sorry, I can't help with other religeons.

How 'official' is Dante's inferno? That's left me confused for a while, since he seems to take a lot of liberties in adapting greek myth and adding useful political elements into his story.

Side note: Dante's Inferno is, for much of it, a political attack on many of Dante's rivals or simply those who disagreed with him; many of the 'sinners' he meets in Hell are real people who were against him.

How 'official' is Dante's inferno? That's left me confused for a while, since he seems to take a lot of liberties in adapting greek myth and adding useful political elements into his story.

Side note: Dante's Inferno is, for much of it, a political attack on many of Dante's rivals or simply those who disagreed with him; many of the 'sinners' he meets in Hell are real people who were against him.

It sort of depends on how you want to reference it. If you go strictly biblical, then not very official. The Bible itself provides very scant details as to the nature of Hell. Indeed, over the course of the entire work, the concept changes from sheol to Hades to Gehenna, depending on translation and language. There are a couple of references, such as Matthew 13:37-42, Mark 9:45-47, and a slew of stuff in Revelation. General concensus among these passages seems to indicate there's lots of fire and burning, so that is consistant with Dante's version.

If you want to go with what they Catholic church teaches...well, still there's some question. Recent proclamations seem to indicate that "Hell" is now viewed as less of a place of fire and brimstone and more of an utter absence and sundering from God. I'm sure there could be fire as well, but it's not really the main event.

Dante's Inferno is pretty much exactly what you described it as: a politically motivated attack on his rivals embroidered by poetic imagery.

Does the moral system derived from Christianity favour a competative society, in which one expects rewards relative to the amount of work done, or a cooperative society, in which everybody is supposed to do the best they can for the common good and is rewarded equally, despite the fact that the contributions of some seem more valuable than those of others ?

Or, to rephrase: is Christianity more compatible with the groundideas of socialism or capitalism ? And if capitalism.. why are most Christian European countries so socialist ?

Does the moral system derived from Christianity favour a competative society, in which one expects rewards relative to the amount of work done, or a cooperative society, in which everybody is supposed to do the best they can for the common good and is rewarded equally, despite the fact that the contributions of some seem more valuable than those of others ?

Or, to rephrase: is Christianity more compatible with the groundideas of socialism or capitalism ? And if capitalism.. why are most Christian European countries so socialist ?

Christianity is very concerned with helping those in need. But it also teaches that if you dont work you should not eat. Its more compatible with a socialist system. However, who told you that the governments of christian european nations are based on religion?

Ok...

The whole communion thing...

Seriously...

Eat of this bread, for it is my body....
Drink of this wine, for it is my blood....

What purpose could this action of eating bread and wine, wich are symbols relating to the blood and flesh of Christ?

That...is cannibalism.

Why on earth would Jesus Christ, ask his followers to remember him, by performing an act of symbolic cannibalism?

How does that question fit into this thread?


What?

Correct me if I am mistaken, but did you not create this thread with the purpose of answering questions about Christianity?

Communion is a pretty important ritual in Christianity, is it not?

What?

Correct me if I am mistaken, but did you not create this thread with the purpose of answering questions about Christianity?

Communion is a pretty important ritual in Christianity, is it not?

woops, sorry. I lost track of which threads I was looking at.

Ok...

The whole communion thing...

Seriously...

Eat of this bread, for it is my body....
Drink of this wine, for it is my blood....

What purpose could this action of eating bread and wine, wich are symbols relating to the blood and flesh of Christ?

That...is cannibalism.

Why on earth would Jesus Christ, ask his followers to remember him, by performing an act of symbolic cannibalism?


It was symbolic, it was not literal. To understand that you have to understand the symbolic nature of the Jewish seder (which is what was being celebrated when Jesus did this). There are 5 cups in the Jewish seder, each one symbolizes something different. The fifth cup, the cup of Elijah (or cup of redemption) is not drunk during seder because it is reserved for the messiah who will redeem the Jews. This is the cup that Jesus drank from and offered to his disciples. His blood, which would be shed on the cross, was what would give us redemption, that is why he said this is my blood. The bread he used was Matzah, a three layered unleavened bread (hard like a cracker), it was broken as his body would be broken for our sins. That is the symbolism behind this. His body would be broken and his blood spilled for our redemption.

The reason that Christianity has caused many wars is because they try to convert people. They feel that they are the only religion that has any validity and it is your job so "save" as many people as you can by shoving Christian propoganda down everyone's throats.

It was symbolic, it was not literal. To understand that you have to understand the symbolic nature of the Jewish seder (which is what was being celebrated when Jesus did this). There are 5 cups in the Jewish seder, each one symbolizes something different. The fifth cup, the cup of Elijah (or cup of redemption) is not drunk during seder because it is reserved for the messiah who will redeem the Jews. This is the cup that Jesus drank from and offered to his disciples. His blood, which would be shed on the cross, was what would give us redemption, that is why he said this is my blood. The bread he used was Matzah, a three layered unleavened bread (hard like a cracker), it was broken as his body would be broken for our sins. That is the symbolism behind this. His body would be broken and his blood spilled for our redemption.

and they called us, the jews, blood drinkers! and it is not "the cup of redemption" O, and someone does drink from the cup and Jesus was a heretic for drinking the wine in the first place by that logic! hello! am i the only one who can see this?

It was symbolic, it was not literal. To understand that you have to understand the symbolic nature of the Jewish seder (which is what was being celebrated when Jesus did this). There are 5 cups in the Jewish seder, each one symbolizes something different. The fifth cup, the cup of Elijah (or cup of redemption) is not drunk during seder because it is reserved for the messiah who will redeem the Jews. This is the cup that Jesus drank from and offered to his disciples. His blood, which would be shed on the cross, was what would give us redemption, that is why he said this is my blood. The bread he used was Matzah, a three layered unleavened bread (hard like a cracker), it was broken as his body would be broken for our sins. That is the symbolism behind this. His body would be broken and his blood spilled for our redemption.

Just lettin' everyone know that the debate about the literal or symbolic meaning of the eucharist is not universally agreed upon in Christianity. Most Protestant Denominations believe in the symbolic significance, while Catholics and Orthodox believe in the literal interpretation. The origional Greek of all of the Gospels is unclear on which one was meant, so it is really just a matter of what you feel like believeing.

and they called us, the jews, blood drinkers! and it is not "the cup of redemption" O, and someone does drink from the cup and Jesus was a heretic for drinking the wine in the first place by that logic! hello! am i the only one who can see this?

No it's not the true cup, nor did it contain blood.

It's just a symbol of remembrance, to drink and eat together with Christian brothers and sisters till Jesus comes again.

Jews can drink wine. It's muslims that can't touch alcohol (I think).

and they called us, the jews, blood drinkers! and it is not "the cup of redemption" O, and someone does drink from the cup and Jesus was a heretic for drinking the wine in the first place by that logic! hello! am i the only one who can see this?


I didnt say it is called the cup of redemption, I said that is what it symbolizes, I clearly said its the cup of Elijah (which according to Jewish custom no one drinks from).

I am aware that Jesus was considered a heretic by Jews, thats why he was killed shortly after this dinner afterall.

Jesus claimed to be the messiah. Only the messiah could drink from that cup. Therefore either Jesus was a heretic or he was the messiah. What is strange about that? Thats what we've known about Jesus all this time.

The reason that Christianity has caused many wars is because they try to convert people. They feel that they are the only religion that has any validity and it is your job so "save" as many people as you can by shoving Christian propoganda down everyone's throats.

That.. but also other reasons, like fighting for land, and religion is always involved, because Religion is closer to the heart compared to like nationalism in terms of making people fight. See the 'Crusades' thread. Quite interesting stuff.

All other religions call and make converts. Christianity isn't the only one.

However, who told you that the governments of christian european nations are based on religion?

History and sometimes the parties themselves ;) There are quite a lot of Christian parties in power in Europe (e.g. CDU, CDA). Though they are not the entire government of their countries, their ideals do shape the political spectrum. And historically most Europen countries were founded in a time where you simply were one of the flavours of Christianity and the monarch ruled by the grace of God - or even was a principle figure in a church by definition. Naturally this is reflected in the organisation of constitution, law and government.

The point is that Christians have the right...

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

-Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 19

... and the God Given obligation ...

And Jesus came to them and said "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I commmanded you.

-Matthew 28.18-20

To act as missionaries for our Faith.

My understanding is that the founding pronciples of Christianity are:

1) Accept that Jesus is your saviour and the son of god, and
2) Treat others as you wish to be treated.

As I understand it, everything other rule can be derived from these two principles. The New Testament is the new covenant between humanity and god. While it found its first followers in Judaism, it is separate enough as to not be considered just a variant of Judaism, but a faith in its own right. My question is:
Why does Christianity fall back on Old Testament scripture in regards to its approach to social issues? Christians are not Jews, and the crucifixion of Jesus ruled any previous religious sacrificing redundant, as his sacrifice is intended to suffice for all the indiscretions of humanity.

Why does Christianity fall back on Old Testament scripture in regards to its approach to social issues? Christians are not Jews, and the crucifixion of Jesus ruled any previous religious sacrificing redundant, as his sacrifice is intended to suffice for all the indiscretions of humanity.

As a Christian, I still scratch my head why Christians still do that. I have friends who circumsize though their not jews, but Christians. They say God asked Abraham and his seed to do it. But isn't that a covenant from God to his children (The jews)? :)

They don't get it, they think everything written in the bible is written directly at them.

But it also teaches that if you dont work you should not eat.

How do you justify that statement in the light of the miracle of the loaves and fishes? Those people didn't work for it, Jesus simply fed them because they were hungry.

All other religions call and make converts. Christianity isn't the only one.

Not true. Christianity is the only major religion that actively seeks converts. For all other major religions, you have to go to them ... they don't come to you.

and they called us, the jews, blood drinkers! and it is not "the cup of redemption" O, and someone does drink from the cup and Jesus was a heretic for drinking the wine in the first place by that logic! hello! am i the only one who can see this?

Weeell... as Christians we believe that Elijah had already come to announce that Jesus was the messiah (He was John the Baptist according to many Christians I know). Therefore Jesus wasn't doing anything heretic from his perspective or that of the disciples. What's the point of having a cup for someone who's already dead? (John the Baptist was Jesus' cousin, and had his head chopped off by Herod) At the Passover meal my church had, we ended by drinking from the cup left for Elijah, if I remember correctly.

At the Passover meal my church had, we ended by drinking from the cup left for Elijah, if I remember correctly.

:rolleyes:

Why would you have a Passover meal in the first place? The Seder commemorates our (OUR) salvation from Egypt. You had nothing to do with it and your people weren't there.

Silly mishugoyim.

:rolleyes:

Why would you have a Passover meal in the first place? The Seder commemorates our (OUR) salvation from Egypt. You had nothing to do with it and your people weren't there.

Silly mishugoyim.
Silly Yahudi-Muslim :p

Does the moral system derived from Christianity favour a competative society, in which one expects rewards relative to the amount of work done, or a cooperative society, in which everybody is supposed to do the best they can for the common good and is rewarded equally, despite the fact that the contributions of some seem more valuable than those of others ?

Or, to rephrase: is Christianity more compatible with the groundideas of socialism or capitalism ? And if capitalism.. why are most Christian European countries so socialist ?
i think i can help...it does favor helping those in need, and it does teach that those who do not work should not eat, but there's one bit our friend forgot. Jesus also teaches that any who do what they can, they will all be rewarded equally.

Not true. Christianity is the only major religion that actively seeks converts. For all other major religions, you have to go to them ... they don't come to you.
true, but if you saw it as saving them, as we do, would you not do the same thing?

Ok...

The whole communion thing...

Seriously...

Eat of this bread, for it is my body....
Drink of this wine, for it is my blood....

What purpose could this action of eating bread and wine, wich are symbols relating to the blood and flesh of Christ?

That...is cannibalism.

Why on earth would Jesus Christ, ask his followers to remember him, by performing an act of symbolic cannibalism?
that's an excellent question...i really don't know why He would compare it to eating and drinking, but the symbolism is that His flesh was broken and His blood poured out to save us. maybe it has something to do with the fact that jews would eat the animals used in sacrifices. Christ was the ultimate sacrifice.

The reason that Christianity has caused many wars is because they try to convert people. They feel that they are the only religion that has any validity and it is your job so "save" as many people as you can by shoving Christian propoganda down everyone's throats.
i'm sorry, but i must disagree. all the wars caused by christianity were, in fact, caused by power- and money-hungry individuals with power in the church, willing to use Christ as an excuse.

How do you justify that statement in the light of the miracle of the loaves and fishes? Those people didn't work for it, Jesus simply fed them because they were hungry.
but they were hungry because they were listening to Him, when they could have been working or buying or selling. they'de been listening to Him for at least a few days, remember, and they hadn't yet eaten. remember aldo that when Mary was listening to Jesus teach, while her sister was preparing the meal, Jesus said that Mary had chosen the more important task.

Was Jesus always aware of His 'Godness' or did He slowly develop over 30 years into being the 'messiah'?

Was his personality seperate from being the 'messiah' or would have Jesus been the same person if the prophecy of His redeeming the world have been removed? Was Jesus a man before being a God?

thanks.

Was Jesus always aware of His 'Godness' or did He slowly develop over 30 years into being the 'messiah'?

Was his personality seperate from being the 'messiah' or would have Jesus been the same person if the prophecy of His redeeming the world have been removed? Was Jesus a man before being a God?

thanks.
those are very difficult questions to answer, but i'll do my best.
i believe He was always aware of His "Godness", mostly because of how young He was when His parents left Him teaching at the temple on their trip to Jerusalem. I believe that you cannot seperate the God from the man in Christ, without the one the other would not have existed, in that person. Jesus was definitely God before man. check John 1:1:

In the beginning was the Word (Christ), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning.

hope that helps.

How does the whole Justice/Mercy thing work?

I get told things like

"Everyone is a sinner. God cannot abide sinners. It's unjust to allow sinners to go to heaven."

BUT

"Through Jesus, there is grace, et cetera."

How does that make letting sinners (anyone not-Jesus) in to heaven just? How does that make it any less just to let the non-Christians (Jews, et cetera) in to heaven?


More importantly: What is more important, justice or mercy? To what degree? And do these concepts exist beyond the deity, or did it decide them?

People, christophobes mainly, go on and on about the Christians starting conflicts that led to the Crusades, but they didnt, it was the Eygptian Muslims followed by the Seljek Turks first denying Christians pilgrims access to the Holylands that led to them.
The Mulims didnt want to share.

Its right in here:

http://www.crusades.ws/

Also I admit to of course the Christian Crusaders being incredibly gross and violent, but hey thats war.
The Muslims werent much better either.

How does the whole Justice/Mercy thing work?

I get told things like

"Everyone is a sinner. God cannot abide sinners. It's unjust to allow sinners to go to heaven."

BUT

"Through Jesus, there is grace, et cetera."

How does that make letting sinners (anyone not-Jesus) in to heaven just? How does that make it any less just to let the non-Christians (Jews, et cetera) in to heaven?


More importantly: What is more important, justice or mercy? To what degree? And do these concepts exist beyond the deity, or did it decide them?
some excellent questions...wow, i say that way too much. alright:
all are sinners, but through Christ's sacrifice, the sin can be stripped away, meaning we are no longer sinners. it's not that only christians get into heaven, it's that only those who have asked for forgiveness and accepted Christ as their savior do. some "christians haven't done this. some jews have. Jesus says "I desire mercy, not sacrifice." He said this to the pharisees, who's "sacrifice" was their dedication to the law, and therein, justice. it would seem mercy is more important. without God, there is no good or evil, just or unjust, etc. hope that helps.

But what makes him unable to say "Okay, you cranky atheists who are otherwise wonderful people? You're going to heaven anyways."? At least those atheists who would desire to go to such a place? Why can't someone have thought Vishnu was the one true way all their life, but otherwise been, inside and out, as good a person as any average Christian, go to heaven? It's a tiny mistake to make in a world with so many religions.

Does the deity get to decide what is and is not just?

And why does justice even matter, ultimately, if mercy is more important?

I, for instance, have enough mercy in my heart that, as much as I'd want to beat the tar out of the guy, I consider eternal damnation even too much for the worst of humanity. Let Stalin and friends have their own heaven. Their own guilt will be more than enough punishment. They were just ignorant psychos, after all. Let Jerry Falwell cavort with John the Baptist, I say.

It fails to make sense for me, a cranky atheist, to be more merciful than the almighty deity of merciful forgiveness.

But what makes him unable to say "Okay, you cranky atheists who are otherwise wonderful people? You're going to heaven anyways."? At least those atheists who would desire to go to such a place? Why can't someone have thought Vishnu was the one true way all their life, but otherwise been, inside and out, as good a person as any average Christian, go to heaven? It's a tiny mistake to make in a world with so many religions.

Does the deity get to decide what is and is not just?

And why does justice even matter, ultimately, if mercy is more important?

I, for instance, have enough mercy in my heart that, as much as I'd want to beat the tar out of the guy, I consider eternal damnation even too much for the worst of humanity. Let Stalin and friends have their own heaven. Their own guilt will be more than enough punishment. They were just ignorant psychos, after all. Let Jerry Falwell cavort with John the Baptist, I say.

It fails to make sense for me, a cranky atheist, to be more merciful than the almighty deity of merciful forgiveness.
i suggest you read "the case for faith" by lee strobel, it talks alot about this. God cannot, it is against His nature, simply forgive without an invitation. and remember, hell is simply eternity serperated from God, and the majority of those who go there will likely be happier there than they would have been in heaven.

i suggest you read "the case for faith" by lee strobel, it talks alot about this. God cannot, it is against His nature, simply forgive without an invitation. and remember, hell is simply eternity serperated from God, and the majority of those who go there will likely be happier there than they would have been in heaven.

I agree that Lee Strobel is a good author (although i havent read the case for faith) but i can't agree that anyone would be happier in heaven than hell... hell is separation from God but once you know God, that separation would drive you insane... and i can't remember where it's said that hell is only separation from God...

Yeah. Hell gets changed every few generations. So it's essentially a meaingless term. But its use still assumes that someone wouldn't want to convert after death.

And why can't he forgive without an invitation? How is that a perfection or a benevolent act? It suggests he lacks power to act, along the lines of various spirits in Pagan mythology.

And dude, I have enough mythology books to go through as is.

I agree that Lee Strobel is a good author (although i havent read the case for faith) but i can't agree that anyone would be happier in heaven than hell... hell is separation from God but once you know God, that separation would drive you insane... and i can't remember where it's said that hell is only separation from God...
not that it is only seperation from God, but that's the only time it's described with anything other than a metaphor. so i take it to be the only bit we know for sure. i guess ur right....but still, if someone had experienced God, but ran from Him all their life, and died that way, don't you think they'd be happier away from Him?

Yeah. Hell gets changed every few generations. So it's essentially a meaingless term. But its use still assumes that someone wouldn't want to convert after death.

And why can't he forgive without an invitation? How is that a perfection or a benevolent act? It suggests he lacks power to act, along the lines of various spirits in Pagan mythology.

And dude, I have enough mythology books to go through as is.
sry dude, i worded that wrong. WILL not, not cannot. it goes against His nature, who He is. i'm not sure why He can't, but this is the part where i like to remember that "His ways are not our ways, and His thoughts are not our thoughts" and stop thinking about it.

Yes, but it suggests that his ways are to be less caring than many mortals, which goes against what the general concept is supposed to be.

I am willing to forgive people I consider the filth of existance, in regards to an afterlife, where they're harmless, and will learn their error.

I am, thus, more forgiving than the deity who espouses forgiveness like mad.

There's an issue here. And not thinking about it is a dangerous mode.

How do you justify that statement in the light of the miracle of the loaves and fishes? Those people didn't work for it, Jesus simply fed them because they were hungry.

The need to work for your food does not mean that no one can ever give you something you didnt work for. It means you cant be lazy and rely on mooching off of other people for your sustenance.

Yes, but it suggests that his ways are to be less caring than many mortals, which goes against what the general concept is supposed to be.

I am willing to forgive people I consider the filth of existance, in regards to an afterlife, where they're harmless, and will learn their error.

I am, thus, more forgiving than the deity who espouses forgiveness like mad.

There's an issue here. And not thinking about it is a dangerous mode.
see, He's not less caring though. He is not willing to take away our free will. He literally says those who want to go to heaven can. If you offer your child a trip to Disney Land, and he doesn't ask to go, is making him go anyways truelly more loving? it's a difficult question...

People, christophobes mainly, go on and on about the Christians starting conflicts that led to the Crusades, but they didnt, it was the Eygptian Muslims followed by the Seljek Turks first denying Christians pilgrims access to the Holylands that led to them.
The Mulims didnt want to share.

Its right in here:

http://www.crusades.ws/

Also I admit to of course the Christian Crusaders being incredibly gross and violent, but hey thats war.
The Muslims werent much better either.

You know, finger pointing never helps anything.

You know, finger pointing never helps anything.
i don't think he's trying to finger point. but neways, that was the CATHOLIC church, and as long as the world realises that i am in no way affiliated with them, i'm happy.

You know, finger pointing never helps anything.

I wasnt trying to help anything.
Just stating a fact.

i don't think he's trying to finger point. but neways, that was the CATHOLIC church, and as long as the world realises that i am in no way affiliated with them, i'm happy.

Gee thats nice of you, the Crusades were organised specifically to free the Holy land, to give the right back to ALL Christians to pay homage to Jesus Christ and the sacred sites mentioned in the Bible.
Which was taken away by first some Eygptian Caliph, then enforced by the invading Muslim Seljek Turks.
You could show a little gratitude.
The Crusades achieved this with Saladin agreeing in a truce with Richard the Lion Heart, which allowed Christian pilgrims access to the Holy lands again, and to end the harrassment of Christians living in the Holy Land.
Unfortunately, he died a few years after, and the ban from the Muslims came down again.

not that it is only seperation from God, but that's the only time it's described with anything other than a metaphor. so i take it to be the only bit we know for sure. i guess ur right....but still, if someone had experienced God, but ran from Him all their life, and died that way, don't you think they'd be happier away from Him?

I always thought that if anyone seriously truly saw God for who He is they wouldn't run from Him, they would love Him... but thats just my opinion

i don't think he's trying to finger point. but neways, that was the CATHOLIC church, and as long as the world realises that i am in no way affiliated with them, i'm happy.

I'm not Catholic, but i think it'd be a cool idea if Christians stopped arguing with each other all the time, even if we do disagree on some issues... :)

Yes, but it suggests that his ways are to be less caring than many mortals, which goes against what the general concept is supposed to be.

I am willing to forgive people I consider the filth of existance, in regards to an afterlife, where they're harmless, and will learn their error.

I am, thus, more forgiving than the deity who espouses forgiveness like mad.

There's an issue here. And not thinking about it is a dangerous mode.
Here's the thing that's always gotten to me about the Heaven issue with non-Christians. First off, except in the cases of those who claim to have no religion, every other religion seems to ahve some sort of afterlife system already defined, and if they go on their faith like we go on ours, then they're taken care of. Whatever. I'm not going into the merits of other faiths.
However, even as a non-Christian, if, before you die (even on your deathbed) you renounce your ways and accept God, and ESPECIALLY if you have a priest there to forgive your sins at death, you're pretty much taken care of. It's also a matter of Last Rites and blah blah blah, I'm sure all the non-Christians have heard that Catholic stuff before.
Can't really speak much on how it works for the Protestants, though. I'd assume that at least the Episcopals do it similar to us Catholics.....I mean, they're like.....Diet Catholics anyway.