Da Vinci Code Questions

[jillian]

It's relative. A nonbeliever would not consider his/her actions blasphemous. A believer will consider the nonbeliever's blasphemous actions blasphemous.

The comment was made in jest. I believe what I believe, and in that is included that nonbelievers will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven. However, I do not seriously condemn people to Hell. They do that themselves and pointing it out serves no purpose to a conversation except to incite.

I try to be respectful of nonbelievers rights to "name their own poison." It's you libs I don't give a break.

My question was tongue in cheeck, too. And I don't know about others, but I'm a believer...just not in what you believe. But as you said, everyone gets to choose their own poison. I don't think a perfect and Divine Creator would condemn any of his children if they make an effort to be good people. But that's the difference between your belief system and mine.

 

[liberalogic]

You confuse faith with science, which requires proof. You also confuse the Church with a democracy where people have a voice. In the Church, there is no such process, nor is there supposed to be one. The Church is supposed to defend the faith from heresy and practice Orthodoxy. If someone doesn't like the doctrine of the Church, on matters such as the Virgin Birth, Christ's divinity, the Holy Trinity and so forth, then they are no longer part of the Church.

If you allow people to believe whatever they please, you then get a situation like the Universalist Unitarians or the Church of England. In fact, isn't the Church of England ready to split over the issue of gay ministers?

It's called "faith" for a reason. If you require proof, then it's not faith.

I was responding to your question, "How can one say that Gnosticism is heresy?"

And, just because a group of people who claim to be Christian don't believe in the Trinity, doesn't mean they're Christian. As I said, the Nicene Creed lists the beliefs of Christians. If you don't subscribe to all of them, no, you're not a Christian, you're a member of "The Church of The A La Carte or of the Chinese Menu", not Christianity. Christianity isn't Burger King, you can't always have it your way.

I think the blaspheming douchebags are those who claim to be Christians and readily fall for tripe like the DaVinci Code. Of course, the Vatican already weighed in on the subject and declared the DaVinci Code blasphemous and dangerous to those in the faith.

This is the problem with organized religion. You say that if you believe, you need no proof. I agree-- but then the catholic church comes along and passes absurd regulations that are extrapolations of Christ's and/or God's teachings.

Does anyone else not think that it's ridiculous to have a Pope? He is elected by human beings and then we are told that he is closest to God. But did God choose him? Even the idea of sainthood: who gave human beings the right to declare saints? The catholic church defeats the entire purpose of religion-- it's man-made, divisive, and rigid. At least the non-denominational christians and the protestants simplify religion (to some extent) and let it rest on faith rather than man.

 

[KarlMarx]

This is the problem with organized religion. You say that if you believe, you need no proof. I agree-- but then the catholic church comes along and passes absurd regulations that are extrapolations of Christ's and/or God's teachings.

Does anyone else not think that it's ridiculous to have a Pope? He is elected by human beings and then we are told that he is closest to God. But did God choose him? Even the idea of sainthood: who gave human beings the right to declare saints? The catholic church defeats the entire purpose of religion-- it's man-made, divisive, and rigid. At least the non-denominational christians and the protestants simplify religion (to some extent) and let it rest on faith rather than man.

The Catholic Church does not defeat the purpose of religion, it is one of the greatest charities in the world. It clothes, feeds, educates and cures millions. How it becomes divisive, is somewhat puzzling. Unless, of course, if you believe that the Church should roll over and play dead on issues such as abortion, homosexuality, extra and premarital sex... then, yes, it is divisive. Just as Christ was divisive ("because of me, father shall turn against son, husband against wife...."). The early Church was definitely a pain in the side to the Romans, that was divisive, too.

Rigid... I like that. If only the Catholic Church had been more flexible during the time of Nero, Diocletian and some of the other Roman Emperors, we'd be worshipping Jupiter, Venus and the rest of the pantheon of Roman Gods. So should they accommodate the conviction of the day? The Church exists to preserve orthodoxy and to be Christ's presence on Earth. It was placed here to win popularity contests (which it hasn't).

Saints, by the way, originally meant those who were members of the Church. To become a saint, you must have lived a life that was beyond reproach. Saints are not named willy nilly, it takes years, even decades for someone to become a saint. There is a great deal of research into the candidate's life. Plus at least two miracles that are associated with that person must have taken place.

Of course, when you consider that the Catholic Church is one of the largest if not the largest charitable organizations in the world (I once read that 25% of the world's AIDS victims are being taken care of by the Church), its shortcomings aren't so bad. Yes, then there was the fact that the Catholic Church helped to defeat communism, because the previous Pope had great sway with the Polish masses, and thus, Solidarity was born, and the Russians didn't dare invade because the Pope was ready to call them on it in public.

So, what's the reason behind having a Pope? Because Christ gave Peter the Keys to the Kingdom of God, then, through Apostolic succession, each of his successors. Some agree, some don't. Still you have to admit, the Pope has a lot of sway, much more than Billy Graham or James Dobson. Millions respect the office, others fear it (consider that Castro declared three days of mourning for the passing of the last pope in Cuba, says something, doesn't it? He in effect was admitting the power of the Papacy.)

 

[KarlMarx]

We could debate this:



I am a Christian, and I don't follow the Catholic Church.

I also did not see mention of the Trinity as a separate entity in the Nicene Creed.

The word "Catholic" means "universal", it does not mean the Roman Catholic Church. I believe that phrase is now taken to mean that all Christian Churches are considered "The Church"

This is the mention of the Trinity in the Nicene Creed...

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father [and the Son],
who with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets.

 

[Powerman]

The Church is supposed to defend the faith from heresy and practice Orthodoxy. If someone doesn't like the doctrine of the Church, on matters such as the Virgin Birth, Christ's divinity, the Holy Trinity and so forth, then they are no longer part of the Church.

I'll show you the problem in this line of thinking.

The Catholic Church bases it's faith and doctrine on scriptures.

So if a new book is found that was intended to be part of the bible and never made it in for whatever reason why is it automatically assumed to be heresy?

Men chose which books went into the bible long ago. That's not faith. That's putting things to a vote and then making a belief system based on that.

I don't think you fully grasp how your beliefs were originated. It was a very random process that was decided by humans

 

[manu1959]

I'll show you the problem in this line of thinking.

The Catholic Church bases it's faith and doctrine on scriptures.

So if a new book is found that was intended to be part of the bible and never made it in for whatever reason why is it automatically assumed to be heresy?

Men chose which books went into the bible long ago. That's not faith. That's putting things to a vote and then making a belief system based on that.

I don't think you fully grasp how your beliefs were originated. It was a very random process that was decided by humans

and you know this to be fact based on....................

 

[Powerman]

and you know this to be fact based on....................

Based on history.

This should be common knowledge to everyone on a religious forum

 

[Powerman]

Are you actually trying to tell me that the bible wasn't compiled by a group of men?

That would be one of the most ignorant statements ever

 

[liberalogic]

The Catholic Church does not defeat the purpose of religion, it is one of the greatest charities in the world. It clothes, feeds, educates and cures millions. How it becomes divisive, is somewhat puzzling. Unless, of course, if you believe that the Church should roll over and play dead on issues such as abortion, homosexuality, extra and premarital sex... then, yes, it is divisive. Just as Christ was divisive ("because of me, father shall turn against son, husband against wife...."). The early Church was definitely a pain in the side to the Romans, that was divisive, too.

Rigid... I like that. If only the Catholic Church had been more flexible during the time of Nero, Diocletian and some of the other Roman Emperors, we'd be worshipping Jupiter, Venus and the rest of the pantheon of Roman Gods. So should they accommodate the conviction of the day? The Church exists to preserve orthodoxy and to be Christ's presence on Earth. It was placed here to win popularity contests (which it hasn't).

Saints, by the way, originally meant those who were members of the Church. To become a saint, you must have lived a life that was beyond reproach. Saints are not named willy nilly, it takes years, even decades for someone to become a saint. There is a great deal of research into the candidate's life. Plus at least two miracles that are associated with that person must have taken place.

Of course, when you consider that the Catholic Church is one of the largest if not the largest charitable organizations in the world (I once read that 25% of the world's AIDS victims are being taken care of by the Church), its shortcomings aren't so bad. Yes, then there was the fact that the Catholic Church helped to defeat communism, because the previous Pope had great sway with the Polish masses, and thus, Solidarity was born, and the Russians didn't dare invade because the Pope was ready to call them on it in public.

So, what's the reason behind having a Pope? Because Christ gave Peter the Keys to the Kingdom of God, then, through Apostolic succession, each of his successors. Some agree, some don't. Still you have to admit, the Pope has a lot of sway, much more than Billy Graham or James Dobson. Millions respect the office, others fear it (consider that Castro declared three days of mourning for the passing of the last pope in Cuba, says something, doesn't it? He in effect was admitting the power of the Papacy.)

I did not deny that the catholic church has not done much good...you're absolutely right: it has. When I refer to rigidity and divisivness, I'm not talking about its stance on abortion or homosexuality. As I've made very clear in the past, I think that all christians (catholic or not) are disgracefully prejudiced. Regardless, though, it's their belief and they're entitled to it.

While John Paul II and others have done incredible things, my point is not about their characters or their actions. It's the fact that they are ELECTED BY MEN and then declared to be closer to God. That makes no sense at all...only God can determine that and it should not rest in the hands of clergy.

The same goes with saints. Regardless of their past or the "miracles" that they've seen, human beings are again designating their religious status. Only God can do that.

The rigidity that I speak of stems from issues such as divorce. How many people have suffered through agonizing marriages simply because the church frowned upon divorce? To scoff at divorce is ridiculous: people change with time and sometimes grow apart. That's life. The church should recognize this not because it's a growing trend, but because it is the MORAL thing to do. People shouldn't be trapped in a marriage because they're scared of God.

Also, the church fosters a distanced relationship between man and God. Why go to confession to absolve yourself? Why not just speak directly to God himself? If he is almighty and ubiquitous, he should be able to hear, understand, and absolve without a priest.

And let's not forget how much of this orthodoxy came to be. Augustine's Great Chain of Being subordinated man in the face of the nobility, clergy, and rulers. The fact that people could become "closer to God" by giving money to the church was absurd. It was merely a ploy to keep the poor in their place (guaranteeing them salvation if they complied with their role on the chain), while the richer got richer.

When you create a hierarchy, as the church has, the message of Christ tends to become distorted by corruption and greed. It's no wonder why the church has lost so many followers over the last few years: people want to worship christ, not the buffer in between.

 

[KarlMarx]

The rigidity that I speak of stems from issues such as divorce. How many people have suffered through agonizing marriages simply because the church frowned upon divorce? To scoff at divorce is ridiculous: people change with time and sometimes grow apart. That's life. The church should recognize this not because it's a growing trend, but because it is the MORAL thing to do. People shouldn't be trapped in a marriage because they're scared of God.

Having gone through a divorce, I can appreciate the Church's teachings on it. The Bible teaches that divorce, except for reasons of adultery is a sin (look in Matthew Chapter 5:31).

Our culture has gone too far in liberalizing divorce laws. It hurts society, and especially the children. Children of divorce are more likely to commit crime, become the victim of one, use drugs, have mental problems, drop out of school. Too often in our society, the needs of the adults come first and to hell with the kids. Divorced adults are more likely to abuse drugs, alcohol, have emotional problems, commit crimes, etc etc.

Divorce is a multi-billion dollar industry in this country, with lawyers and the counselling industry reaping the benefit. It's pretty obvious to me that they stand to benefit by encouraging it.

Considering the way you feel about divorce being "that's part of life" and that it's "moral", do yourself and any potential spouse of yours a favor, don't get married. And don't have kids. Marriage is a commitment and more so when kids are involved.

If and when you do go through a divorce, tell me how moral it is when you have to pay alimony, child support, get to see your kids every other weekend, and become a stranger to them, and have to divide all your property up with your ex and all the other joys of divorce.

 

[LOki]

Where does God say explicitly that Saturday is Holy? The Bible says God rested on the seventh day; which, is generally given as the Sabbath. God's law is "Remember the Sabbath and keep it Holy."

No specific day of the week is mentioned that I am aware of. We don't even know what increment of time constitutes a "day" to God.

And he said unto them, This is that which the LORD hath said, To morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath unto the LORD: bake that which ye will bake to day, and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning.

And they laid it up till the morning, as Moses bade: and it did not stink, neither was there any worm therein.

And Moses said, Eat that to day; for to day is a sabbath unto the LORD: to day ye shall not find it in the field.

Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the sabbath, in it there shall be none.

It happened on the seventh day, that some of the people went out to gather, and they found none.

Yahweh said to Moses, "How long do you refuse to keep my commandments and my laws?

Behold, because Yahweh has given you the Sabbath, therefore he gives you on the sixth day the bread of two days. Everyone stay in his place. Let no one go out of his place on the seventh day."

So the people rested on the seventh day.

Exodus 16:23-30​

SHHHHH! Secret!

 

[Said1]

SHHHHH! Secret!

I'm not the best on scripture, but it doesn't seem like it says don't work on the sixth day only eat double. Which suites me just fine actually.

 

[dmp]

Since this was originally about the DaVinci Code:

I watched http://www.history.ca/ontv/titledetails.aspx?titleid=97336 last night:

His conclusion?

Something like this:

The Bloodline diagram showing Christ's decendents - 100% fake. The people listed; many never existed. Looking at the DNA of the dead French Queen found NO Middle-Eastern-Typical DNA parts. He called the book MOSTLY Fiction...with just enough fact thrown in to sell.


re: Faith.

I'm amazed. Some of you kids feel it takes strength to require proof. Requiring Absolute Proof of God stems from weakness. Faith in God (neverminding how He truly affects our lives day-to-day) is born from Strength.

re: Constantine.
In fact, Constantine had NOTHING to do with what was included in the New Testament - that decision was made FAR earlier than Constantine, even though it was a long process not finally determined until about 50 years AFTER constantine. The four gospels we have in use to day have been in use since the 1st century. ALL of those treat Jesus as devine. What happened was The Church officially recognizing what they'd been using forever.

They are the ONLY Gospels ALL Christians used from the very beginning.

 

[Gunny]

SHHHHH! Secret!

Yeah, I already covered that part. Where's the part that says Saturday is the Sabbath? Who determined Sunday was the first day of the week and Saturday the last?

 

[Abbey Normal]

Since this was originally about the DaVinci Code:

I watched http://www.history.ca/ontv/titledetails.aspx?titleid=97336 last night:

His conclusion?

Something like this:

The Bloodline diagram showing Christ's decendents - 100% fake. The people listed; many never existed. Looking at the DNA of the dead French Queen found NO Middle-Eastern-Typical DNA parts. He called the book MOSTLY Fiction...with just enough fact thrown in to sell.


re: Faith.

I'm amazed. Some of you kids feel it takes strength to require proof. Requiring Absolute Proof of God stems from weakness. Faith in God (neverminding how He truly affects our lives day-to-day) is born from Strength.

re: Constantine.
In fact, Constantine had NOTHING to do with what was included in the New Testament - that decision was made FAR earlier than Constantine, even though it was a long process not finally determined until about 50 years AFTER constantine. The four gospels we have in use to day have been in use since the 1st century. ALL of those treat Jesus as devine. What happened was The Church officially recognizing what they'd been using forever.

They are the ONLY Gospels ALL Christians used from the very beginning.

My husband and I watched that show last night too. Great ending, don't you think? But then, we knew how it would end.

 

[Hobbit]

Concerning the Sabbath:

Yes, Saturday is the original Sabbath. The Jews have been observing it for millenia, so they know what's what. However, the Christian switching of the holy day from Saturday to Sunday has nothing to do with sun worship. Christ was executed the day after the Passover, just before the Sabbath. Since Jewish days start in the evening (rather than midnight, like ours), that means Jesus was executed on a Friday. Counting Friday, he rose on the third day, which would be Sunday. Using Sunday as the Christian day of worship is a celebration of the resurrection of Christ. It's as simple as that. No origins in some pagan ritual or anything.

 

[LOki]

Concerning the Sabbath:

Yes, Saturday is the original Sabbath. The Jews have been observing it for millenia, so they know what's what. However, the Christian switching of the holy day from Saturday to Sunday has nothing to do with sun worship. Christ was executed the day after the Passover, just before the Sabbath. Since Jewish days start in the evening (rather than midnight, like ours), that means Jesus was executed on a Friday. Counting Friday, he rose on the third day, which would be Sunday. Using Sunday as the Christian day of worship is a celebration of the resurrection of Christ. It's as simple as that. No origins in some pagan ritual or anything.

A rationale made up in direct contradiction to the Bible, heretic.

 

[liberalogic]

Having gone through a divorce, I can appreciate the Church's teachings on it. The Bible teaches that divorce, except for reasons of adultery is a sin (look in Matthew Chapter 5:31).

Our culture has gone too far in liberalizing divorce laws. It hurts society, and especially the children. Children of divorce are more likely to commit crime, become the victim of one, use drugs, have mental problems, drop out of school. Too often in our society, the needs of the adults come first and to hell with the kids. Divorced adults are more likely to abuse drugs, alcohol, have emotional problems, commit crimes, etc etc.

Divorce is a multi-billion dollar industry in this country, with lawyers and the counselling industry reaping the benefit. It's pretty obvious to me that they stand to benefit by encouraging it.

Considering the way you feel about divorce being "that's part of life" and that it's "moral", do yourself and any potential spouse of yours a favor, don't get married. And don't have kids. Marriage is a commitment and more so when kids are involved.

If and when you do go through a divorce, tell me how moral it is when you have to pay alimony, child support, get to see your kids every other weekend, and become a stranger to them, and have to divide all your property up with your ex and all the other joys of divorce.

I'll tell you how moral it is. I spent 15 fucking years in a house where two parents lost their minds screaming, punching, throwing, and abandoning while they had two kids at home-- one of whom couldn't function on his own due to a mental disability. It was an unbearable situation and they refused to get divorced for numerous reasons, none of which was that they still loved each other. But eventually they somehow came to their senses and did it.

It's true that divorce sucks. But subjecting kids to the shit that goes on because parents won't get a divorce can be far worse. In many cases, it is the moral thing to do. And if God can't accept that, then he's not who he claims to be.

 

[dmp]

I'll tell you how moral it is. I spent 15 fucking years in a house where two parents lost their minds screaming, punching, throwing, and abandoning while they had two kids at home-- one of whom couldn't function on his own due to a mental disability. It was an unbearable situation and they refused to get divorced for numerous reasons, none of which was that they still loved each other. But eventually they somehow came to their senses and did it.

It's true that divorce sucks. But subjecting kids to the shit that goes on because parents won't get a divorce can be far worse. In many cases, it is the moral thing to do. And if God can't accept that, then he's not who he claims to be.

Stop being such a baby. (shrug)


Re: Divorce.

Divorce makes people adulterers. Unless they've made themselves an adulterer.

Adultry can be forgiven as much as any OTHER sin.


Frankly I doubt Divorce and re-marraige is any Super Big Deal in God's eyes, as God cares about 'US' far more than he cares about 'Marriage'. He didn't Die for "marriage" - he died and rose again for 'us'.

 

[Annie]

Having gone through a divorce, I can appreciate the Church's teachings on it. The Bible teaches that divorce, except for reasons of adultery is a sin (look in Matthew Chapter 5:31).

Our culture has gone too far in liberalizing divorce laws. It hurts society, and especially the children. Children of divorce are more likely to commit crime, become the victim of one, use drugs, have mental problems, drop out of school. Too often in our society, the needs of the adults come first and to hell with the kids. Divorced adults are more likely to abuse drugs, alcohol, have emotional problems, commit crimes, etc etc.

Divorce is a multi-billion dollar industry in this country, with lawyers and the counselling industry reaping the benefit. It's pretty obvious to me that they stand to benefit by encouraging it.

Considering the way you feel about divorce being "that's part of life" and that it's "moral", do yourself and any potential spouse of yours a favor, don't get married. And don't have kids. Marriage is a commitment and more so when kids are involved.

If and when you do go through a divorce, tell me how moral it is when you have to pay alimony, child support, get to see your kids every other weekend, and become a stranger to them, and have to divide all your property up with your ex and all the other joys of divorce.

I agree with what you say Karl, though I was granted sole custody, the ex had the children much less than you post about. At the same time, if there had been some way of making that marriage work, it would have been better for the kids.