# Idol worship and money changing in Christian churches



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

Some churches have statues of jesus, mary, and saints in them, and people pray to those statues. Do you think this is idol worship? Do you think how some people revere and ritualize the crucifix is also a form of idol worship?

Do you think passing the basket for donations during service is a business transation that breaks the commandment for not working on the sabbath?

I am just looking for some other peoples thoughts on these things, not trying to start a fight.

Thanks.


----------



## Parttimefarmer (May 5, 2011)

I don't have any idol issues with statues. Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, doesn't matter, some people need visual.

Passing the basket has always felt like panhandling to me. I don't go to church anymore because of the amount of money they spent doing flashy things with that money, so I am sure that's a big part of it. What if you do church Wed or Sat night, then is passing it OK? I figure church is church, it's either OK or it's not regardless of the day.


----------



## MushCreek (Jan 7, 2008)

Passing the basket should NOT be a business transaction; you're simply using that method to collect the offerings that we are supposed to offer. I never read in the Bible where it was inappropriate to do so on the Sabbath, since that's when you worship, right?

The church I attend (Methodist) uses an empty cross to signify the risen Christ. It is there as a reminder of what He did for us. I don't know that folks really worship that particular piece of metal or wood, but what it stands for. I'm a little undecided about all of the saints that some denominations seem to worship, though.

I think most, if not all major religions are somewhat corrupted by the influence of man, and so I take away what I need from Sunday service, without buying into all of their teachings. I sometimes get more out of a sunrise than I do out of a sermon- God talks to us in many different ways.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

People are NOT worshipping those statues. They are reminders of who they are praying to.
If I wanst to as Mary, Mother of Jesus to intercede forme, help w/a problem, it helps to see her 'resemblance' in church.
It's always profound to walk into church & see Jesus on the cross. Cannot be reminded enuf.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

A church I used to go to had a locked donation box inside the front entrance. The lid had a slot cut into it for slipping money into the box when people were coming or going. I always liked that better than having an offering basket being passed around and having the box there meant people could contribute to it at any time, not only on days of service. 

I don't think tithing to the church is a business transaction. People who go to church are supposed to tithe to help support the minister and the maintenance of the church. If people want a service and a place to meet for that service then they need to pay their tithe for it. No service on this earth comes free and dropping money in the offering basket on a day of service in the church does not mean it's a business transaction.

As to the statues and the cross - they are not idols being worshipped. They only become idols when people stop worshipping the god that the statues represent and begin worshipping the statues instead. Otherwise, they are only physical symbols or messengers rather than written words acting as visual, tactile representatives or ambassadors of the true object of devotion. The true object of devotion and worship is unseen. There is no one single symbol of God because nobody knows what God really looks like. If everyone knew what God really looked like you can bet your bottom dollar there would only be symbolic statues that looked like God instead of all those other symbolic representatives. Speaking to those symbols, touching them and praying to God through them does not make them idols any more than a bible can be considered an idol. 

.


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

Jesus commented on the widow's mite. To do so, the widow had to make her contribution in a public way for it to be known. Christ's comment was positive. 

I don't know if this means anything, but it displays that a public contribution on the Sabbath was not frowned upon.


----------



## mekasmom (Jan 19, 2010)

City Bound said:


> Some churches have statues of jesus, mary, and saints in them, and people pray to those statues. Do you think this is idol worship?


Yes.

[/QUOTE]Do you think how some people revere and ritualize the crucifix is also a form of idol worship?[/QUOTE]

No.

[/QUOTE]Do you think passing the basket for donations during service is a business transation that breaks the commandment for not working on the sabbath?[/QUOTE]

No. I wouldn't consider that work.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

As others have stated, I don't believe the statues are being worshipped any more than I worship the cross. It's a visual reminder to us. As for the offering, I also believe giving is a form of worship, so I have no problems with passing the offering plate on Sundays or any other day.


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

The answer to these questions lies in the heart of each worshipper, known only to themselves and God.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

City Bound said:


> Some churches have statues of jesus, mary, and saints in them, and people pray to those statues. Do you think this is idol worship? Do you think how some people revere and ritualize the crucifix is also a form of idol worship?


Sort of. If you are praying to Jesus it really doesn't matter if you close your eyes or look at the ceiling or stare at a statue. If you are praying to someone else it really doen't matter if you close your eyes or look at the ceiling or start at a statue you are still praying to someone other than God.




City Bound said:


> Do you think passing the basket for donations during service is a business transation that breaks the commandment for not working on the sabbath?


No, as stated its just as much a form of worship as singing.

[/QUOTE]


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

Sonshine, I was raised catholic and I have seen a lot, I mean a lot, of people worshiping statues, holy water, crosses, the pope, and pictures. I have seen people praying to to these statues like they are real people.

The bible forbides making a graven image of god. Also, the image of jesus that most of us have come to accept as his real likeness is a spectulation about what he looked like, the same with the likeness of his mother mary.


----------



## 36376 (Jan 24, 2009)

We consider the collection a form of worship. We keep the images to a very minimun to avoid the idol worship. 

As far as the statues are concerned, I agree with the person who said that the intent is in the heart of the worshipper. God knows what the intent is.


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

I don't worship the Cross, I worship _at_ the Cross.


----------



## Old John (May 27, 2004)

I grew up Catholic. And I did not know anyone simple minded enough to think the Statues were Jesus or the Saints or who worshipped a statue. Even as children we could understand that the statues were mere symbols, or repesentations.

Now, when at Benediction, there was the Adoration given to Jesus, "actual Presence" in the large consecrated, Altar Bread, displayed in the golden Monstrance, on the Altar, we were Not worshipping the Altar Bread but the "actual Presence" of Jesus in the Consecrated Bread through the miracle of "transubstantiation". It is a doctrinal Belief, within Catholic Doctrine. 
More than a few other Christians might have a hard time with that one, hunnh.

ETA,......If you are not familiar with some of the terms, even my old American Heritage dictionary defines them.


----------



## house06 (Jan 4, 2007)

Hopefully this discussion will not turn into yet another "catholic bashing" Those seem quite popular these days.....


----------



## house06 (Jan 4, 2007)

ps the only thing that bothers me regarding the collection 'tithing' tradition in our church is that the collection envelopes have an amount that you are supposed to fill in. I know the purpose is to make counting the collection easier however I think your donation amount should be between you and God. I leave that blank and noticed that other regular contributors do as well.... 

Sorry money counters!!


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

Just for clarification, Sunday is not the Sabbath and Christians are not bound by any cerimonial requirements of the Law.

Colossians 2:13-17
New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)


13 When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature,[a] God made you* alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, 14 having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross. 15 And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.[c] 

16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ. 

Galatians 4:8-11
New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)


Paul&#8217;s Concern for the Galatians
8 Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods. 9 But now that you know God&#8212;or rather are known by God&#8212;how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? 10 You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! 11 I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you.*


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

house06 said:


> ps the only thing that bothers me regarding the collection 'tithing' tradition in our church is that the collection envelopes have an amount that you are supposed to fill in. I know the purpose is to make counting the collection easier however I think your donation amount should be between you and God. I leave that blank and noticed that other regular contributors do as well....
> 
> Sorry money counters!!



So I would imagine that getting a tax reciept for income tax and collecting some money back from the government would be something you would not endorse?


----------



## gideonprime (Oct 17, 2007)

It seems as though at some churches (not pointing fingers just commenting) the only idol they worship is a big giant dollar sign.


$$$


----------



## Saffron (May 24, 2006)

mekasmom said:


> Yes.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Ditto.

However, the church I attend does not have even a cross for worshiping at, only an altar.

Passing the basket in many churches made me uncomfomfortable because of how it was done. I do prefer a box at the doorway for the tithes instead. That being said, either works as it is in accordance with God that we return 10% to Him.


----------



## Saffron (May 24, 2006)

Old John said:


> I grew up Catholic. And I did not know anyone simple minded enough to think the Statues were Jesus or the Saints or who worshipped a statue. Even as children we could understand that the statues were mere symbols, or repesentations.
> 
> Now, when at Benediction, there was the Adoration given to Jesus, "actual Presence" in the large consecrated, Altar Bread, displayed in the golden Monstrance, on the Altar, we were Not worshipping the Altar Bread but the "actual Presence" of Jesus in the Consecrated Bread through the miracle of "transubstantiation". It is a doctrinal Belief, within Catholic Doctrine.
> More than a few other Christians might have a hard time with that one, hunnh.
> ...


My dh was raised Catholic and all his family still is, more or less. I'm not bashing them as I don't fully understand some of their beliefs, so that makes them odd to me.

But I had it explained to me that when they take the wafer and the wine, they truly believe that as you consume it, it truly becomes the flesh and the blood and then a part of you? No offense, but that totally freaks me out.

There is other stuff I didn't understand either, but that one really threw me. If there is a better explanation, I'd love to hear/read it.

That being said - I don't like attending a church where they have the offering baskets/plates on long sticks. I want to duck when they come near me. :ashamed:


----------



## Saffron (May 24, 2006)

postroad said:


> So I would imagine that getting a tax reciept for income tax and collecting some money back from the government would be something you would not endorse?


Yeah, that confuses me. #1 the gov doesn't need to know how much I tithe; #2 why did the church decide to start doing that?; #3 why is the church keeping track of what I tithe?
The first time a church sent me a letter with that info for my taxes is when I went to cash-only tithing, plus a call telling them to stop keeping track.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

Saffron said:


> My dh was raised Catholic and all his family still is, more or less. I'm not bashing them as I don't fully understand some of their beliefs, so that makes them odd to me.
> 
> But I had it explained to me that when they take the wafer and the wine, they truly believe that as you consume it, it truly becomes the flesh and the blood and then a part of you? No offense, but that totally freaks me out.
> 
> ...


They have some textual justification for their position.


John 6:50-54
New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)

50 But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which a man may eat and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.&#8221; 

52 Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, &#8220;How can this man give us his flesh to eat?&#8221; 

53 Jesus said to them, &#8220;I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 

1 Corinthians 11:23-28
New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)


23 For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, &#8220;This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.&#8221; 25 In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, &#8220;This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.&#8221; 26 For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord&#8217;s death until he comes. 

27 Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28 A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup. 



Matthew 26:27-29
New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)


27 Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, &#8220;Drink from it, all of you. 28 This is my blood of the[a] covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29 I tell you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father&#8217;s kingdom.&#8221;


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

City Bound said:


> Sonshine, I was raised catholic and I have seen a lot, I mean a lot, of people worshiping statues, holy water, crosses, the pope, and pictures. I have seen people praying to to these statues like they are real people.
> 
> The bible forbides making a graven image of god. Also, the image of jesus that most of us have come to accept as his real likeness is a spectulation about what he looked like, the same with the likeness of his mother mary.


Your perception isn't correct. If someone is praying, and looking at a statue, what makes you think that is what they are worshipping?


----------



## gideonprime (Oct 17, 2007)

Tricky Grama said:


> Your perception isn't correct. If someone is praying, and looking at a statue, what makes you think that is what they are worshipping?


In fairness that seems like a pretty logical line to draw.

You don't wait at the cashier to get deli meat, you wait at the deli.

Though, as you say, people and what is on their mind is never as simple as all that.:cowboy:


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

no and no


----------



## salmonslayer (Jan 4, 2009)

I am not a Christian (not anti-Christian by any means) but the Mrs is and we tried to find a church we were comfortable with when we moved here and finally have mostly settled on a small rural Methodist chuch though we are not weekly goers for a couple of reasons (namely they are really hung up on supporting an Ethiopean ministry rather than the extreme needs of this poverty stricken county). A lot of the churches around here have gone all new age to attract the young ones and have big screen TVs where they play modern videos and people go down front with hands raised to the video screen and it just makes us uncomfortable. We (the Mrs mostly) likes a plain alter with just a cross which to her represents the sacrifice made and the Methodist church we go to fairly regularly meets that need for us and they have a great family oriented service and ministry.

As for the collections, I have no problem supporting the church and minister but have issues with using money I donate for foreign missions when I see such a need locally. Most of the trappings of modern churches are designed to create an atmosphere and keep people in the fold. Even though I am not a Christian, I personally enjoy some of those trappings and have always enjoyed going to Catholic services with friends when I was in the Military.

If a church meets your needs then I dont thionk its fair to criticise what faith or what pieces of religious icons are present...its the faith that counts.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

City Bound said:


> Some churches have statues of jesus, mary, and saints in them, and people pray to those statues. Do you think this is idol worship?


Yes Exodus 20:1-7



> Do you think how some people revere and ritualize the crucifix is also a form of idol worship?


Yes Exodus 20:1-7
The Cross, was a torture device. Men, including Christ were brutally murdered on it.



> Do you think passing the basket for donations during service is a business transation that breaks the commandment for not working on the sabbath?


Sabbath is sundown Friday till sundown Saturday. Exodus 20:8-11



> I am just looking for some other peoples thoughts on these things, not trying to start a fight.
> 
> Thanks.


If you want more Scriptures, I can dig them up for you!


----------



## vicki in NW OH (May 10, 2002)

Religious statues/icons in churches/temples are not worshipped. 

http://www.catholic.com/library/Do_Catholics_Worship_Statues.asp


----------



## EasyDay (Aug 28, 2004)

Tricky Grama said:


> Your perception isn't correct. If someone is praying, and looking at a statue, what makes you think that is what they are worshipping?


That's an iffy one for me. Maybe the representation helps them focus? :shrug: I most often worship outside amid nature. I'm not worshiping nature, but feel more focused and closer to God amid a mass of his creations.
Reminds me of that hymn: "I come to the garden alone... while the dew is still on the roses....". 

However, one that isn't iffy for me is the behavior towards the Pope. Kneeling before him and kissing the ring... that's clearly worship, and is wrong. The Pope is a sinner just like the rest of us, and he does not deserve the glory that is God's alone. Tricky, I seriously don't intend to offend, just saying I could never get past that one.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

EasyDay said:


> However, one that isn't iffy for me is the behavior towards the Pope. Kneeling before him and *kissing the ring... that's clearly worship*, and is wrong. The Pope is a sinner just like the rest of us, and he does not deserve the glory that is God's alone. Tricky, I seriously don't intend to offend, just saying I could never get past that one.


Actually, no it isn't worship at all. That's a traditional ritual called "Kissing the Ring of the Fisherman" and is meant as a sign of respect (not worship) to the successor of St. Peter, the reigning Pope. There are a few rituals around each ring.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_of_the_Fisherman

.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

Well, I am not sure what church law is about the statues or the icons, but what I have heard from believers is that the satutes, because god is omnipresent and omniscient, are imbued with the presence of the holy ghost and that by praying to or caring for the statues people are in a way making a literal connection to god. I dont know what the truth is.

laura makes a good point about Exudus 20: 1-7 "You shall not carve idols for yourselves in the shape of anything in the sky above or on the earth below or in the waters below the earth." A human is of the earth.
It also goes on to say "You shall not bow down before them or worship them"
making the sign of the cross, kneeling before them, and lighting candles to statues in a church or a shrine, or to an icon sounds like it fits that explanation. What do you think?
Also, kissing the popes ring or priest laying down on the floor in front of the pope to express reverence and obediance sounds like it fits this prohabition also.

I am not bashing catholics, please dont think that. I was raised all my life by Irish catcholics and I went to catholic school for seven years, it is what I am familar with, and what I am trying to make peace with.

Some people referenced Paul. There are christians who do not give Paul that much significance. He was not an apostle. The catholic church broadcasted paul's point of view,and I think they did so because Paul was the link the Romans used to claim that they were the true church chosen by god. There were many other christian churches active in those days, the romans were the ones, because of their wealth and military might, who were able to domonate the discussion.

One again, I am not trying to start a fight or offend anyone. I am just trying to make peace with my own mind and soul.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

jesus never told us to kiss a ring, so the ring is fake, it is not christian.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

Jesus never told christians to split off into over 33,000 different christian denominations either. Does that mean that only one is real and that all the others with all their trappings and rituals are fakes and not christian? I don't think so.

.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

No. it means for me that anything added by humans,be they rituals, clothing, or politics is unpure and antichrist.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

Perhaps you could explain then what you believe IS pure and christly?

.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

City Bound said:


> No. it means for me that anything added by humans,be they rituals, clothing, or politics is unpure and antichrist.


It may help if you post Scripture's to show that "God said it" and it's not just 'your opinion'.

You are right......but having God's Word (and since HE said it first  that might help other readers see, it's He who decided.....


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

Laura Zone 5 said:


> It may help if you post Scripture's to show that "God said it" and it's not just 'your opinion'.
> 
> You are right......but having God's Word (and since HE said it first  that might help other readers see, it's He who decided.....


Oh please God no, let's just this one time stay away from scriptures can we? It would be so nice to see what a thinking person has to think for themself instead of having to rely on scriptures that were written by other men.

.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

laura, I wish I could. I am just learning more about scripture so I can not qoute or illuminate like an expert.

Nature, when it come to christianity, if it is not in the bible then it cant be added. Anything added by humans is false. As for christliness, I think you can only get a sense of christ from reading his own words and actions and trying to learn directly from HIS teachings. You can not read paul's teachings and and consider them as teaching coming from jesus. They are paul's teachings, not jesus.

Anyway I am not a scholar, these are just my gut feelings.


----------



## Parttimefarmer (May 5, 2011)

The bible isn't the word of God literally. It is the word of God as interpreted (even if dictated) and translated by man.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

City Bound said:


> laura, I wish I could. I am just learning more about scripture so I can not qoute or illuminate like an expert.
> 
> Nature, when it come to christianity, if it is not in the bible then it cant be added. Anything added by humans is false. As for christliness, I think you can only get a sense of christ from reading his own words and actions and trying to learn directly from HIS teachings. You can not read paul's teachings and and consider them as teaching coming from jesus. They are paul's teachings, not jesus.
> 
> Anyway I am not a scholar, these are just my gut feelings.


Your gut is right. And maybe it's not your 'gut' as much as it is The Spirit, guiding you!! That IS His job!!:happy:
I will post Scriptures for you....then you can seek them out in full context for yourself!!


----------



## HeelSpur (May 7, 2011)

IDK, I'm to poor to go to church.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Idolatry

Idol Worship

Charms

Idols

That's a good start!!
If you scroll to the bottom of the link, it will show you all the Scripture's with these words present.

Remember, the OT was penned in Hebrew and the NT was penned in Greek. A lot has be 'scrambled' in translations, but if you look up the Hebrew or Greek.....it will point you to the original intent. Hope that helps.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Saffron said:


> Yeah, that confuses me. #1 the gov doesn't need to know how much I tithe;


Unless you plan to deduct your tithes from your taxes.




Saffron said:


> #2 why did the church decide to start doing that?


Doing what?



Saffron said:


> #3 why is the church keeping track of what I tithe?


Because most people who tithe want the info for taxes. Also a church is like any other NPO when it comes to money. It has to keep track of every dollar in and out. Most people don't have any idea of the tons of paperwork the government requires.




Saffron said:


> The first time a church sent me a letter with that info for my taxes is when I went to cash-only tithing, plus a call telling them to stop keeping track.


Cash tossed in the bucket/plate/box is the only way to prevent them from doing it.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

salmonslayer said:


> I am not a Christian (not anti-Christian by any means) but the Mrs is and we tried to find a church we were comfortable with when we moved here and finally have mostly settled on a small rural Methodist chuch though we are not weekly goers for a couple of reasons (namely they are really hung up on supporting an Ethiopean ministry rather than the extreme needs of this poverty stricken county). A lot of the churches around here have gone all new age to attract the young ones and have big screen TVs where they play modern videos and people go down front with hands raised to the video screen and it just makes us uncomfortable. We (the Mrs mostly) likes a plain alter with just a cross which to her represents the sacrifice made and the Methodist church we go to fairly regularly meets that need for us and they have a great family oriented service and ministry.
> 
> As for the collections, I have no problem supporting the church and minister but have issues with using money I donate for foreign missions when I see such a need locally. Most of the trappings of modern churches are designed to create an atmosphere and keep people in the fold. Even though I am not a Christian, I personally enjoy some of those trappings and have always enjoyed going to Catholic services with friends when I was in the Military.
> 
> If a church meets your needs then I dont thionk its fair to criticise what faith or what pieces of religious icons are present...its the faith that counts.


I'm not sure how you meant your last statement but faith is not all that counts.

Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. 
James 2:17 KJV


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

I have some doubt as to the validity of the written word of the NT being God's word at all.

For all intent and purpose there should be no written code of any kind in the New Covenant.

And as to the validity of the Holy Spirit. Well all I have is the witness of several individuals who sincerely believed themselves to be led by the Spirit and they were of conflicting opinion on key issues?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

naturelover said:


> Jesus never told christians to split off into over 33,000 different christian denominations either. Does that mean that only one is real and that all the others with all their trappings and rituals are fakes and not christian? I don't think so.
> 
> .


I agree and disagree. Remember what Christ said in Matthew 7:21-23.

"_âNot everyone who says to me, âLord, Lord,â will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only those who do the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, âLord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?â Then I will tell them plainly, âI never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!â_

There are a lot of people in a lot of churches who are going to be quite shocked when they get there and hear this. This includes a lot of people in a lot of "main stream" denominations who have twisted the teachings of Christ to fit how they THINK it should REALLY be done.

There are things which are clear, black and white; adultery for example. The Bible clearly states that's something God views as wrong and should not be done by anyone at any time. Then there are somethings which are not so clear, a little gray so to speak. Take alcohol. No where does the Bible say "Thou shall not consume any alcohol." But there are places where it says you probably should avoid it because its not a wise thing to do. Its these gray areas which can cause different groups of real true followers of Christ to segregate themselves from others.

Back the the booze, if you think you should not drink and think others should not drink then its a wise thing for you to associate with others who think the same way. It prevents disharmony in the fellowship.

The problem becomes when churches who add to or take from the Word. For example there are churches who state flat out drinking is a sin and if you continue drinking you can not be a Christan. That church is wrong and anyone who follows it is putting themselves in danger of hearing what I posted earlier.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

Its a puzzle to me?

As one who is considered a unbeliever and part of the "world" I am instructed to look to the body of Christ (believers) for verification of the power of the Spirit.

John 17:20-22
New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)


Jesus Prays for All Believers
20 &#8220;My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, 21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one:


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

I found the conflicting messages about booze in the bibles confusing also. If I could try to sum up all the conflicting examples and teachings about booze, i think it would be safe to say that the bible teaches that drinking is ok in moderation and in good context. A wedding, sabbath dinner (for the jews wine with sabbath dinner was and still is part of their observance) and festivals are all good times to drink in moderation. Because you want to chase women or because you feel depressed is not a good reason.

For those fanatical churches that flare up about drinking being a sin and of the devil, how do they explain jesus drinking wine, turning water into wine, and leaving as an element of salvation the drinking of wine in remembrance of him? How do they get around that? it is a sin to drink wine, but jesus invites us to drink wine? Where is the logic.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

City Bound said:


> Sonshine, I was raised catholic and I have seen a lot, I mean a lot, of people worshiping statues, holy water, crosses, the pope, and pictures. I have seen people praying to to these statues like they are real people.
> 
> The bible forbides making a graven image of god. Also, the image of jesus that most of us have come to accept as his real likeness is a spectulation about what he looked like, the same with the likeness of his mother mary.


I understand what you're saying. I'm not Catholic, but my DH was raised as one and his family still attend Catholic church, in fact, one of his Aunts is a nun. As for people worshipping statues, I'm sure some do, but I don't believe that's what the church teaches. I taught children's church for many years, and one of the things I did to try to get the kids to understand about worshipping something was having them figure out how many hours of each day do they devote to certain things like tv, playing consoles ect compared to how much time they spend with God. Whatever we put before God can become our God. I've met many Catholics that don't worship the statues, the saints of the Virgin Mary, but do show respect to them.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

house06 said:


> ps the only thing that bothers me regarding the collection 'tithing' tradition in our church is that the collection envelopes have an amount that you are supposed to fill in. I know the purpose is to make counting the collection easier however I think your donation amount should be between you and God. I leave that blank and noticed that other regular contributors do as well....
> 
> Sorry money counters!!


I think the whole purpose behind having a place to fill in the amount you give is so at the end of the year you can claim your donations for tax purposes.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Saffron said:


> Yeah, that confuses me. #1 the gov doesn't need to know how much I tithe; #2 why did the church decide to start doing that?; #3 why is the church keeping track of what I tithe?
> The first time a church sent me a letter with that info for my taxes is when I went to cash-only tithing, plus a call telling them to stop keeping track.


Many people agree with you, but there are some that would like to claim their contributions on the tax forms.


----------



## Oggie (May 29, 2003)

I got my first lecture about money changing in church the time I put in a $20 and wanted to take out a $10.

Next Sunday I stopped at a Seven-11 and bought a cup of coffee so I'd be sure to have a smaller bill.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

Sonshine said:


> Many people agree with you, but there are some that would like to claim their contributions on the tax forms.



Some part of me has a philisophical difficulty with the concept of people being able to claw back part of their charitable giving from the tax man.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

Oggie said:


> I got my first lecture about money changing in church the time I put in a $20 and wanted to take out a $10.
> 
> Next Sunday I stopped at a Seven-11 and bought a cup of coffee so I'd be sure to have a smaller bill.


Tsk Tsk. Shopping on a Sunday. 

My Dad was so anal about Sundays he would always fill the car with gas on Saterday night.

And no resteraunt meals neither.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Here's my take on this whole discussion. When Jesus died he sent the Holy Spirit to lead us in all truths. I have never found a church that follows my understanding of the scriptures 100%. Everyone who has a desire to learn more and have a closer relationship with Jesus needs to read the Bible for themselves and let the Holy Spirit be their teacher. I'm not saying to not listen to preachers of Bible teachers, but listen, then pray and search out the scriptures for yourself. God doesn't want us to be ignorant of what He wants from us and for us, but we need to take the time to develop that relationship with Him. When we do so, He'll lead us in the direction we should go in. Whether it's giving money to a missionary, going to a particular church, ect. Never take man's word on things, because every man is shaped by their own life's events. You'll be surprised at how much you can learn by just praying and studying on your own.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

postroad said:


> Some part of me has a philisophical difficulty with the concept of people being able to claw back part of their charitable giving from the tax man.


And that would be between you and God, as it has to be for each person who gives.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

post good point. you are not really giving, if you are getting it back.

I have a problem with how the donations are wasted. If I give money I want a say in how the money is used.

When I was a boy in church we use to have to sit there every sunday in the winter while the priest went on and on about how we all needed to dig deeper into our pockets to pay for the heating bills. Year after year I had to hear this. Seriously, what does priest expect when the church has large cavernous ceilings, single pane stain glass windows with poor seals, stone floors, thin brick walls with no insulation, and 15 old doors unfit to keep the winter wind out??? Give me a break. Why should I have to pay to heat their building if it was built wrong and because they are vain and impractical.


----------



## salmonslayer (Jan 4, 2009)

watcher said:


> I'm not sure how you meant your last statement but faith is not all that counts.
> 
> Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
> James 2:17 KJV


I dont disagree with you on the works part but I suspect we probably wouldnt agree on what "works" means. Belonging to an organized religious order or hitting the church and tossing some money into the plate each week isnt what I would interpret that to mean. I am not a Christian but I am not without beliefs and if someone needs to publically demonstrate their works (going to church, publically announcing what they give etc.) then more power to them...its just not something I believe in.

Churches have a valuable purpose in our society and I am at times envious of those who are true believers and rely on blind faith..and it seems to me if your a true believer you dont need to prove that to anyone but your god.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

naturelover said:


> A church I used to go to had a locked donation box inside the front entrance.
> 
> .


I have seen these in several churches... and always wondered why they were locked. Some how the word faith comes to mind when I see locks on the donation boxes or the church doors even. :shrug: I dont lock my doors at home, nor on my car when I go to town, I figure God will protect me from thieves and if He doesnt, He will surely see to it that they do not steal more than they need and leave me enough to fill my needs. Maybe I just have more faith than the preacher.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

I knew a fella who would go to church services and help himself to the cash in the plate as it passed by.

He had some mental health issues and was homeless so perhaps he was entitled to it.

A local church finally did find him some help so good on them for that.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

gideonprime said:


> It seems as though at some churches (not pointing fingers just commenting) the only idol they worship is a big giant dollar sign.
> 
> 
> $$$


There are those that believe that God.... the guy that created the entire universe and everything in it.... needs your money. :shrug: Personally I think it will do a soul more good to take their money to Mickey D's and buy a burger for the homeless guy down the street.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> There are those that believe that God.... the guy that created the entire universe and everything in it.... needs your money. :shrug: Personally I think it will do a soul more good to take their money to Mickey D's and buy a burger for the homeless guy down the street.


So does jesus. jesus never built a church, he would preach out on the streets, in nature, and they gathered into those places and they gathered in people's homes.


----------



## salmonslayer (Jan 4, 2009)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> There are those that believe that God.... the guy that created the entire universe and everything in it.... needs your money. :shrug: Personally I think it will do a soul more good to take their money to Mickey D's and buy a burger for the homeless guy down the street.


 You most eloquently layed out my feelings...the only thing I would add is that you wouldnt grandstand about it.


----------



## georger (Sep 15, 2003)

City Bound said:


> Some churches have statues of jesus, mary, and saints in them, and people pray to those statues. Do you think this is idol worship? Do you think how some people revere and ritualize the crucifix is also a form of idol worship?


Yes, absolutely. I've always felt that if a person has to go to a specific building and do certain rituals to try to find their god, they're looking in the wrong place.



City Bound said:


> Do you think passing the basket for donations during service is a business transation that breaks the commandment for not working on the sabbath?


Church is big business! All of those tax free dollars after all! Gotta pay for those court battles somehow, those buggering priests molesting kids for years. Lawyers aren't free.



City Bound said:


> I am just looking for some other peoples thoughts on these things, not trying to start a fight.
> 
> Thanks.


Understood! Best of luck!


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Sonshine said:


> I understand what you're saying. I'm not Catholic, but my DH was raised as one and his family still attend Catholic church, in fact, one of his Aunts is a nun. As for people worshipping statues, I'm sure some do, but I don't believe that's what the church teaches. I taught children's church for many years, and one of the things I did to try to get the kids to understand about worshipping something was having them figure out how many hours of each day do they devote to certain things like tv, playing consoles ect compared to how much time they spend with God. Whatever we put before God can become our God. I've met many Catholics that don't worship the statues, the saints of the Virgin Mary, but do show respect to them.


When they tell me they don't worship the statues nor even Mary I find it hard to swallow seeing as how they pray to her. 

Hail Mary, full of grace. Our Lord is with you. Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen. 

To me that is lifting her to god level.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

salmonslayer said:


> I dont disagree with you on the works part but I suspect we probably wouldnt agree on what "works" means. Belonging to an organized religious order or hitting the church and tossing some money into the plate each week isnt what I would interpret that to mean. I am not a Christian but I am not without beliefs and if someone needs to publically demonstrate their works (going to church, publically announcing what they give etc.) then more power to them...its just not something I believe in.


We just might agree. The church I go to has a 'slogan'; "The Church has left the building."




salmonslayer said:


> Churches have a valuable purpose in our society and I am at times envious of those who are true believers and rely on blind faith..and it seems to me if your a true believer you dont need to prove that to anyone but your god.


Again we are probably more in agreement than you think. When our church does something out in the community you will not find any name attached to it other than Jesus. If you ask we are willing to tell you about our church but first we are going to tell you about Christ. Also after we tell you about our church if you don't think its for you we are more than willing to tell you about other churches in the area. Heck, we'll even introduce you to someone from another church so they can tell you about theirs. IOW, if you aren't into "contemporary " music (our band plays stuff like this [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZemwJqDV9g"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZemwJqDV9g[/ame]) we are more than willing to tell you where you can find a church which doesn't.


----------



## gryndlgoat (May 27, 2005)

I think it become idol worship when the inanimate things (crosses, statues, bibles, etc.) are believed to have "magical powers" (think holding up a cross or installing a statue or sprinkling "holy water" to ward off evil spirits or the Devil) rather than just being items that draw the person to prayer.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

City Bound said:


> post good point. you are not really giving, if you are getting it back.
> 
> I have a problem with how the donations are wasted. If I give money I want a say in how the money is used.
> 
> When I was a boy in church we use to have to sit there every sunday in the winter while the priest went on and on about how we all needed to dig deeper into our pockets to pay for the heating bills. Year after year I had to hear this. Seriously, what does priest expect when the church has large cavernous ceilings, single pane stain glass windows with poor seals, stone floors, thin brick walls with no insulation, and 15 old doors unfit to keep the winter wind out??? Give me a break. Why should I have to pay to heat their building if it was built wrong and because they are vain and impractical.


First think of this.
God Almighty, who spoke the UNIVERSE into existence, who Created man, from a handful of dirt, and His Breath.......who Created DNA, the atom, the ocean, the heavens as far as you can see........
Do you REALLY THINK HE NEEDS MAN'S MONEY????
BAAAAAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAH
No.
He doesn't NEED money, are you kidding me?
He rose Lazarus from the DEAD.....not just 'hit him with the paddles cause he flat lined'.....Lazarus was 3 days, stinkin' the place up, DEAD.
Jesus spoke and said LAZARUS COME OUT.
So do you think Jesus who can raise the dead needs man's 30.00?

No, He doesn't.

What He's concerned with is your heart.
Do people give 30.00 begrudgingly? Do people grumble about giving the 30.00, because you NEED it or you could have bought ____ with it or you just don't feel like giving it this week? Do people drop it in the bucket and say HA HA....I gave 30.00, and this jack wagon over here only gave 10.00 and get SPECIAL seats at church, or preferential treatment?
Guess what?
THEIR 30.00 means NOTHING to God.
Nothing.
Did I mention, nothing.....because their hearts were rotten when they gave it. It meant, nothing.

He doesn't need money.
He is concerned with your heart.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

watcher said:


> When they tell me they don't worship the statues nor even Mary I find it hard to swallow seeing as how they pray to her.
> 
> Hail Mary, full of grace. *Our Lord is with you*. Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, *Mother of God*, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen.
> 
> To me that is lifting her to god level.


Meh. If she's the mother of God I'd say that elevates her to Goddess status. One cannot argue saying "but she was a human" because the immaculately conceived child she gave birth to was also a human. If Jesus was a god then so was his mother.

.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

naturelover said:


> Meh. If she's the mother of God I'd say that elevates her to Goddess status. One cannot argue saying "but she was a human" because the immaculately conceived child she gave birth to was also a human. If Jesus was a god then so was his mother.
> 
> .


So if you implant a zebra embryo into a horse and the horse gives birth then your horse is suddenly a zebra?

BTW, how many other gods and goddess are there to pray to?


----------



## FeralFemale (Apr 10, 2006)

naturelover said:


> Meh. If she's the mother of God I'd say that elevates her to Goddess status. One cannot argue saying "but she was a human" because the immaculately conceived child she gave birth to was also a human. If Jesus was a god then so was his mother.
> 
> .


Jesus wasn't immaculately conceived, she was. Common mistake.

No she is not a Goddess.


----------



## salmonslayer (Jan 4, 2009)

watcher said:


> We just might agree. The church I go to has a 'slogan'; "The Church has left the building."
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Good to hear Watcher, the Methodist church we do go to is like that minus the contemporary music. I like what they are doing with the singular exception of the fact they seem to be enamored of Ethiopeans for some reason and have lost all reason about it.


----------



## georger (Sep 15, 2003)

Want a prayer shawl? Only $50!

http://www.bennyhinn.org/products/product_detail.cfm/itemid/734


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

gryndlgoat said:


> I think it become idol worship when the inanimate things (crosses, statues, bibles, etc.) are believed to have "magical powers" (think holding up a cross or installing a statue or sprinkling "holy water" to ward off evil spirits or the Devil) rather than just being items that draw the person to prayer.


That is exactly what I was thinking.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

watcher said:


> So if you implant a zebra embryo into a horse and the horse gives birth then your horse is suddenly a zebra?
> 
> BTW, how many other gods and goddess are there to pray to?


Your comment about zebras and horses is a non-sequitur. What makes you think that Mary was implanted with a foreign embryo?

There are as many gods and goddesses to pray to as people have the imagination to create in their minds, and people may call any person a god or goddess if it suits their fancy but there is only ONE real God. That one real God does not come to earth in the form of human flesh. God will only fill human flesh with holy spirit and divine inspiration.



FeralFemale said:


> Jesus wasn't immaculately conceived, she was. Common mistake.
> 
> No she is not a Goddess.


Please explain. Are you saying that Mary was not a virgin mother and that Joseph or some other man commit the sin of getting Mary pregnant out of wedlock? Cuz if so, that's not the story I heard.

As I understand it about Mary, she herself was referred to as the immaculate conception having been believed to be conceived without the stain of original sin (whatever that is), free from personal or hereditary sin and perfect in all ways from the moment she came into being. If this was true of Mary then it would have to also be true of Jesus if Jesus was truly the son of God or the reincarnation of God in the flesh. Like Mary, Jesus would have to have been without the stain of original sin (again - whatever that is), free from personal or hereditary sin and perfect in all ways from the moment he came into being. That is immaculate conception, no? 

.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

watcher said:


> When they tell me they don't worship the statues nor even Mary I find it hard to swallow seeing as how they pray to her.
> 
> Hail Mary, full of grace. Our Lord is with you. Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen.
> 
> To me that is lifting her to god level.


Not that I agree with their theology on this, but it's my understanding they consider it asking Mary to intercede, much like us asking a friend to pray for us. As I said, I don't agree with the theology, but to me that's not worshipping her if they are asking for her intercession. However, I don't believe dead people can intercede for us.


----------



## FeralFemale (Apr 10, 2006)

naturelover said:


> Please explain. Are you saying that Mary was not a virgin mother and that Joseph or some other man commit the sin of getting Mary pregnant out of wedlock? Cuz if so, that's not the story I heard.
> 
> As I understand it about Mary, she herself was referred to as the immaculate conception having been believed to be conceived without the stain of original sin (whatever that is), free from personal or hereditary sin and perfect in all ways from the moment she came into being. If this was true of Mary then it would have to also be true of Jesus if Jesus was truly the son of God or the reincarnation of God in the flesh.
> 
> .


You stated "because the immaculately conceived child she gave birth to" The Immaculate Conception refers to Mary's being conceived without the stain of original sin in order to be the perfect vessel necessary to carry Our Lord. "Immaculate Conception" does not refer to the Incarnation or the virgin birth. 

Your quote I reference above made it seem like you were referring to the common mistake that the virgin birth is the Immaculate Conception.

And she is not a goddess, or otherwise divine in any way. She is holy and/or blessed.


----------



## FeralFemale (Apr 10, 2006)

You know, I really try to hold my tongue (fingers) anymore when the whole 'idol worship' thing comes up. But the whole Catholic bashing thing is a bit hard to take.

I know the OP tried to make it an innocent question, but his later posts showed just another veiled attempt to accuse Catholics of something we simply do not do.

I suggest anyone who is wondering about this supposed aspect of the Church to do some real research on reputable Catholic websites and, perhaps, if you are very curious, attend a Mass. You'll think it is weird just like I think some services I have been to in other religions, but the weirdness is really just being in a service you are not used to. (NOT trying to convert anyone just asking for some true understanding before feeling knowledgable enough to claim to tell others what is or isn't true about Catholicism.)


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

FeralFemale said:


> And she is not a goddess, or otherwise divine in any way. She is holy and/or blessed.


Well I don't really believe that Mary was a goddess or divinity either, no more so than I believe that Jesus was a god or divinity. I think he was just another holy or blessed person, just like his mother. But .... if it turns out he was a god incarnate, then so was his mother because it was her flesh that he was created from. Therefore she would be deserving of being prayed to as a divinity.

But I don't believe either one of them was a god. The one God has never come to earth in the flesh and if God wanted to come to earth in the flesh it wouldn't be necessary to be born out of some other human's flesh. God could just "be there" - POOF - appear out of nowhere with the snap of your fingers. If anyone needed convincing of the existence of God then that would do it. God doesn't need to play games.

.


----------



## FeralFemale (Apr 10, 2006)

Well, those are your beliefs. Not mine. To each his own -- as long as people aren't throwing around Catholic terminology, etc, incorrectly and claiming it is Catholic belief/dogma I don't care.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

Feral, I grew up in a catholic family in a catholic neighborhood and maybe it is not official church belief or doctrine, but many people in the fold do believe that the statues, the holy water, rosery beads, pictures, and other artifacts possess mystical powers and the presence of god, a saint, or some virtue. What about the concecration of a church. I was told as a child that the concecration of church literally brought the presence of god to dwell in the church. Doesnt that make the whole building an idol? If people worship them or not, doesnt even the making of a statue or a picture of god constitute the making of an idol?

The little that I know about church history which may be wrong, is that the statues did not come into the religion until Christianity was made the state religion in the Roman empire. Most romans worshiped idols of their different gods in their temples and in shrines in their own homes. When the people were forced to convert, they brought their idol worship with them, but instead of worshiping roman gods and goddesses they worshiped saints who took the place of the different roman demigods. The same thing happened in south america and the caribian when the africans were forced to become christians, they simply kept worshiping their own gods secretly under the pretense of worshiping saints. That is why santaria and voodoo have christian icons mixed in.

Maybe I am wrong about all this. Seriously, what do I know.

I am not bashing catholics. As an ex-catholic I am trying to make peace with the conflicts that drove me away from the catholic faith and which plague me. Although this may seem like an attempt to slander, it truely is intended to be a discussion. People have strong feelings, convictions, and many misconceptions about many important aspects of life and it is unavoidable that there will be hard feelings and clashing while exploring a topic, but I hope that the discussion will serve to enlighten us all in some way by its exploration.


----------



## hmsteader71 (Mar 16, 2006)

City Bound said:


> Some churches have statues of jesus, mary, and saints in them, and people pray to those statues. Do you think this is idol worship? Do you think how some people revere and ritualize the crucifix is also a form of idol worship?
> 
> Do you think passing the basket for donations during service is a business transation that breaks the commandment for not working on the sabbath?
> 
> ...


If they are praying to these statues then yes, I do believe that is idol worship. 
And yes, I do believe it is wrong to pass a basket. Paul said to purpose in your heart what you could give and lay a little something aside at the first of the week. We attended a Messianic Synagogue for a time that had a box by the door. This box was locked and had a slot in the top where you could place your offerings. I like this much better than passing a basket.
Also, I believe that selling things in the church building is the same thing as when the money changers were in the temple and animals were being sold in it. The house of God is not supposed to be a house of merchandise but a house of prayer.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

naturelover said:


> Your comment about zebras and horses is a non-sequitur. What makes you think that Mary was implanted with a foreign embryo?


Ok, change it to changing your horse to a mule. Christ was, in effect, a hybrid God and man.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Sonshine said:


> Not that I agree with their theology on this, but it's my understanding they consider it asking Mary to intercede, much like us asking a friend to pray for us. As I said, I don't agree with the theology, but to me that's not worshipping her if they are asking for her intercession. However, I don't believe dead people can intercede for us.


That's the point, the only way to "talk" to someone who is dead is to 'pray' to them. Therefore the only way to ask her to help is to pray to her. IIRC, praying to anyone other than God is considered a bad thing by God.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

FeralFemale said:


> You know, I really try to hold my tongue (fingers) anymore when the whole 'idol worship' thing comes up. But the whole Catholic bashing thing is a bit hard to take.
> 
> I know the OP tried to make it an innocent question, but his later posts showed just another veiled attempt to accuse Catholics of something we simply do not do.
> 
> I suggest anyone who is wondering about this supposed aspect of the Church to do some real research on reputable Catholic websites and, perhaps, if you are very curious, attend a Mass. You'll think it is weird just like I think some services I have been to in other religions, but the weirdness is really just being in a service you are not used to. (NOT trying to convert anyone just asking for some true understanding before feeling knowledgable enough to claim to tell others what is or isn't true about Catholicism.)


I'm not bashing Catholics nor Catholicism. I'm just pointing out the places I see where they and it don't line up with the teachings of Christ when others have brought them out. There are many other things I feel they have wrong and if asked I will say. But this is not the place to try to convince a Catholic, no any of the followers of the many other teachings, what they have been doing for all their lives (in most cases) doesn't line up with what Christ has told us to do.

I use the example of someone who has been taught all their lives that the mere act of taking a drink of alcohol is a sin. You can point out to them Christ drank alcohol, that in at least two places the Bible says to give alcohol to people and other things from the Word which shows they have been taught a falsehood but it won't change their mind because they "know" its true because they have been taught it.


----------



## lilmizlayla (Aug 28, 2008)

naturelover said:


> Meh. If she's the mother of God I'd say that elevates her to Goddess status. One cannot argue saying "but she was a human" because the immaculately conceived child she gave birth to was also a human. If Jesus was a god then so was his mother.
> 
> .


no..it does not. "there should be no other Gods before me"..now, i am no literary genius, but it seems to me that he doesnt want us praying to anyone but him.
why would anyone need mary to pray for them? why not just pray to Jesus? 

dont even get me started on the Pope..his flabby heathen self should be in prison


----------



## lilmizlayla (Aug 28, 2008)

FeralFemale said:


> You know, I really try to hold my tongue (fingers) anymore when the whole 'idol worship' thing comes up. But the whole Catholic bashing thing is a bit hard to take.
> 
> I know the OP tried to make it an innocent question, but his later posts showed just another veiled attempt to accuse Catholics of something we simply do not do.
> 
> I suggest anyone who is wondering about this supposed aspect of the Church to do some real research on reputable Catholic websites and, perhaps, if you are very curious, attend a Mass. You'll think it is weird just like I think some services I have been to in other religions, but the weirdness is really just being in a service you are not used to. (NOT trying to convert anyone just asking for some true understanding before feeling knowledgable enough to claim to tell others what is or isn't true about Catholicism.)


nobody really cares about the silly reverence to the pope..the building size Jesus on a cross....its the support of pedophile priests and a Pope that didnt think it was worthy of prosecuting until it was out in the open that really is disturbing.

if you support a church that still has a Pope who doesnt stand against pedophiles? something is really wrong with the religon


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

lil, there are some splinter groups that formed of catholics who love their religion but who do not love the power the clergy have over them. These people are trying to take back their religion from curruption.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

watcher said:


> That's the point, the only way to "talk" to someone who is dead is to 'pray' to them. Therefore the only way to ask her to help is to pray to her. IIRC, praying to anyone other than God is considered a bad thing by God.


Good point, but would praying to them to intercede be the same as worshipping them? I'm not sure. I know I ask people to remember me in prayer, but I don't worship them. 

I'm not sure where that doctrine came from, just like I don't understand praying for those who are already dead, but in Judaism they pray for their loved ones that are already dead and light candles for them too. 

I don't agree with many of the Catholic teachings, such as praying for the saints to intercede, etc, but I'm not sure that the church teaches the worshipping of Mary or the saints.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

IMO, there is no one denomination that is 100% correct. The Bible tells us to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling. None of us knows the heart of anyone else. I'm not Catholic and don't agree with some of their teachings, but does that mean I don't believe any Catholics are Christians? Nope, I firmly believe that many ARE. Who here can say that their preferred denominational teachings are 100% correct? That everything their church teaches is 100% the same as your understanding of the scriptures? I haven't found any one denomination that teaches exactly my thoughts on what the Bible says. That's why we shouldn't look to any man and their interpretations of the scriptures but should read for ourselves and let the Holy Spirit lead us and teach us.


----------



## lilmizlayla (Aug 28, 2008)

City Bound said:


> lil, there are some splinter groups that formed of catholics who love their religion but who do not love the power the clergy have over them. These people are trying to take back their religion from curruption.


in order to BE catholic, one must believe the POPe was chosen by God to be head of his church. if you do not believe that God speaks through that wrinkled old fart..then you are not Catholic.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

lilmizlayla said:


> ...... if you do not believe that God speaks through that wrinkled old fart..then you are not Catholic.


Wrinkled old fart? :shocked:

Wow. Nice. NOT !! Show a little couth, why don't you?

That was totally uncalled for, just disrespectful and insulting of other peoples beliefs and tradition. :bash:

.


----------



## samm (Dec 6, 2008)

i give cash, i dont want to write any thing off on taxs that i have given to the church, that just aint right to me...in my own opinion, i give what i do cuz i want to....
i go to our fairly plain alter to pray, to take communion, i dont want or need extra fancy stuff, i do believe in an open communion....it is Gods table, everyone should be invited...EVERYBODY, not just church members.
we dont have any statues at our church, i do have crosses at my home, i dont worship them or kneel at them....they are just reminders what Jesus did for me........

samm


----------



## FeralFemale (Apr 10, 2006)

naturelover said:


> Wrinkled old fart? :shocked:
> 
> Wow. Nice. NOT !! Show a little couth, why don't you?
> 
> ...


Thank you, NL. I was going to point out LML's posts as an example of Catholic bashing, but I am so tired of defending my religion. I am so tired of pointing out that humans are fallable and that their sins do not negate the reality of my faith in God, nor do they negate the entire principle behind it.

And I am tired of pointing out that the Catholic Church is not alone in hiding the horrors of pedophilia (the press just thought that the Church made a better story -- look up molestation in the Boy Scouts, "Pass the Trash" in America's public schools, or, since Protestant denominations dont really have a centralized head, the insurance claims stats of Protestant churches in regards to civil law suits about molestation. Molestation was a dirty secret of our society in general, not of one particular segment of society)


----------



## wifemommy (Jul 16, 2009)

The beautiful stained glass windows, paintings and statues are not "idolized" They are there as a reminder of our Faith and history. These things are from a time that predates general literacy. The people may not have been able to read the Bible but they could see the pictures and remember. Praying "to" a Saint is not meant in a idol fashion it is like asking a friend to pray with you in the Communion of Saints. The crucifix is a reminder of Jesus dying for us to save us because with out the death there would be no Resurrection. Catholics remember the sacrifice that led to Salvation.
I wish I could address and explain all the misconceptions people have about the Catholic Church however I am not sure how many people would really listen...... Annie


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

Catholics don't need to explain themselves or Catholicism. Catholicism is the largest Christian denomination with more than a billion members, it comprises over half of all Christians worldwide (33,000 denominations) making it the largest denomination for any religion worldwide. Based on that I don't think Catholics who understand it and love it need to worry about trying to explain it. Any other Christians or non-Christians who bash it are just being boorish snobs. Bashing Catholics is no different than bashing Pagans, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Judaism etc. - it's just pure ignorance and holier-than-thou snobbery towards other people's traditions and beliefs.

.


----------



## Old John (May 27, 2004)

naturelover said:


> Catholics don't need to explain themselves or Catholicism. Catholicism is the largest Christian denomination with more than a billion members, it comprises over half of all Christians worldwide (33,000 denominations) making it the largest denomination for any religion worldwide. Based on that I don't think Catholics who understand it and love it need to worry about trying to explain it. Any other Christians or non-Christians who bash it are just being boorish snobs. Bashing Catholics is no different than bashing Pagans, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Judaism etc. - it's just pure ignorance and holier-than-thou snobbery towards other people's traditions and beliefs.
> 
> .


You stated that very well, without a slam at any other denomination or other Faith. A lot of folks just can't seem to get past the idea that there are other folks that have other, just as valid Faith Communities. And that there are many equally valid ways to reverence or pay Homage to Deity.


----------



## house06 (Jan 4, 2007)

never mind


----------



## wifemommy (Jul 16, 2009)

So do you hate every other religion or organization that has ever had a member do anything wrong? What a lonely bitter world you must live in ... I think you need prayers for peace in your heart.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

Old John said:


> You stated that very well, without a slam at any other denomination or other Faith. A lot of folks just can't seem to get past the idea that there are other folks that have other, just as valid Faith Communities. And that there are many equally valid ways to reverence or pay Homage to Deity.


This is weird. Now an Agnostic is going to make a point for orthidox belief.

According to Paul there is only one correct belief leading to salvation.

1 Corinthians 15:1-2
New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)


1 Corinthians 15
The Resurrection of Christ
1 Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2 By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. 

2 Corinthians 11:3-5
New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)

3 But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpentâs cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ. 4 For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it easily enough. 5 But I do not think I am in the least inferior to those âsuper-apostles

Galatians 1:6-9
New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)


No Other Gospel
6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospelâ 7 which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! 9 As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!


----------



## georger (Sep 15, 2003)

You gotta love this!

_
GOD BLESS YOU AS YOU READ.
Thursday, June 16, 2011 12:59 PM
From: "Mrs.Estelle Akam" <[email protected]>
To: undisclosed-recipients

GOD BLESS YOU AS YOU READ.

Greetings,I am Mrs.Estelle Akam. an aging widow suffering from long time illness. i am currently admitted in a hospital here in Abidjan cote d' Ivore, I have some funds I inherited from my late loving husband Mr.Daniel Akam The amount of (US$7.500,000.00) which he deposited Here in cote d'ivore and I need a honest and God fearing person who have the feelings of human that can use this funds for God's work and 15% out of the total funds will be for your compasation for doing this work of God. I saw your email from internet and decided to contact you. Please if you would be able to use these funds for the Lord's work kindly reply to me.

May the Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ the love of God and the sweet fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you and your family's Amen.

Your Sister In The Lord.
Mrs.Estelle Akam_

You see, you too can receive God's blessing in the millions. All you have to do is reply to e-mails like this!


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

samm said:


> i give cash, i dont want to write any thing off on taxs that i have given to the church, that just aint right to me...in my own opinion, i give what i do cuz i want to....
> i go to our fairly plain alter to pray, to take communion, i dont want or need extra fancy stuff, i do believe in an open communion....it is Gods table, everyone should be invited...EVERYBODY, not just church members.
> we dont have any statues at our church, i do have crosses at my home, i dont worship them or kneel at them....they are just reminders what Jesus did for me........
> 
> samm


So give back to Caesar what is Caesarâs, and to God what is Godâs.

Why would you give "Caesar" more than is his?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

naturelover said:


> Catholics don't need to explain themselves or Catholicism. Catholicism is the largest Christian denomination with more than a billion members, it comprises over half of all Christians worldwide (33,000 denominations) making it the largest denomination for any religion worldwide. Based on that I don't think Catholics who understand it and love it need to worry about trying to explain it. Any other Christians or non-Christians who bash it are just being boorish snobs. Bashing Catholics is no different than bashing Pagans, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Judaism etc. - it's just pure ignorance and holier-than-thou snobbery towards other people's traditions and beliefs.
> 
> .


Again I have to say I don't bash anyone or any religion. I do point out where their actions or religion, in my view, vary from the teachings of Christ. I do this because I'm told to. I'm also told if after I have shown them this it is up to them to make the next move. If they are receptive I'm to try to lead them. If they are not receptive I'm to depart and 'shake off the dust of your feet'. IOW just walk away, not stand there and pound them over and over.

I have had a lot of discussions with people from all kinds of religion and many different Christian views. For Christians as long as we agree on 'birth, death and resurrection' then we are close. And for the most part the differences are not going to cause me to worry if the person is Heaven bound. 

From my discussions with Catholics I worry about them due to the teachings of the church. There are simple things such as the saying of formulaic prayers over and over. While I don't necessarily see saying them is wrong nor even a sin, I see them as being against the teachings of Christ in Matthew 6:7. There are other things, such as praying to someone other than God, 'paying' for your sins through actions and the like.

I also point out when people do not even follow their own religion's teaching. Two big example I find in Catholics I'll ask you about. Do you, I'm assuming you are a Catholic, use birth control? Do you think all abortion is sin and therefore should never be done?


----------



## wifemommy (Jul 16, 2009)

I am sorry but what I find to be wrong is deciding you are "saved" so what ever you do after that is fine you still go to heaven. Atonement for ones sins makes much more sense to me though definately NOT the easy way out. Abortion is murder all the time and dh and I have 8 children so draw your own conclusion :run:


----------



## Old John (May 27, 2004)

At least I think you were referring to me. You quoted my Post.




postroad said:


> This is weird. Now an Agnostic is going to make a point for orthidox belief.
> 
> According to Paul there is only one correct belief leading to salvation.
> 
> ...


I never said I was Agnostic. I am by no means Agnostic. I am a Believer, of My Beliefs. But, I believe Many Faiths are Valid for Many different People.
And, No one has a lock on "the Truth, the Whole Truth and Nothing But the Truth.". "Different Faiths for Different Folks", as I see it.

I was formerly, until the age of forty, a Catholic, a very active Catholic.
I grew up in a Catholic home with a Catholic Family. In high school, I was in the minor Seminary, preparing for the Catholic priesthood. That was pretty stressful. And I left it. But, I remained Active as a Catholic.
I raised my 5 children Catholic, up to a point. I taught CCD(like Sunday school). I played guitar & was a songleader at Mass, regularly, ever week for several years.I lead prayer Meetings as a Charismatic Catholic. I studied Cathilicism deeply, in many facets, the Traditions, the Doctrines and the Dogmas. I was immersed in it.

Suddenly, aproaching 40, I lost it. The whole thing just lost all it's meaning, for me. I foundered spiritually. I tried other Churches. But, having been Catholic, they all lacked the Wholeness of Catholicism.The Scripture ceased to have any Truth, for me. It is still a very valid option for many people, despite the glaring Flaws that have been exposed recently.
And since then I have Studied the Truths of many World Religions. And, Many Religions have Truth in them.

I have tried Paganism and Wicca.......The Rituals were great. I tried Ceremonialism. It lacked the Spirituality I wanted. 
I got very heavily into Freemasonry. That lasted about 10 years. I am still a Mason and will always be. I earned all the Degrees, save one. There is a Lot of Truth in Freemasonry.

After that, I searched for the Ancestral Gods of Our European Ancestors.That led me to become a Polytheist, a Northern Heathen, Asatru.
I Honor Our Ancestral Gods regularly. It works for me.

I Know that now, I do not have any of the fear or guilt of Christianity.
I believe in the Principles of Deity, that connect all Living Beings, A Divine Architect guiding Things, the Universe. I am at Peace in my Life.

But, I do Not try to Convert anyone.I do not feel the Need to Justify my Beliefs, to anyone. I just simply state, "This is where I am Spiritually, right now".
And, I'm Content, just where I am.


----------



## postroad (Jan 19, 2009)

I meant that I was an Agnostic. Sorry for the confusion. Just pointing out that Christianity lays claim to the truth and that even within the ranks of the believers Paul made the claim for only one correct form of belief leading to salvation.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

Is this thread becoming a problem? Should we shut it down?


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

watcher said:


> ..... Two big example I find in Catholics I'll ask you about. Do you, I'm assuming you are a Catholic, use birth control? Do you think all abortion is sin and therefore should never be done?


Watcher, you directed the above question to me so I'm answering you. 

I am not a Catholic. I am not a Christian. I believe in one God only but I don't adhere to any religion at all, and I don't believe Jesus or any other person was a god incarnate. 

I believe all people have a right to worship any god of their choice as they see fit and I think other people should mind their own business without interfering or imposing their own beliefs on other people's worship and beliefs. I believe that all such misguided interference and imposition is a terrible sin. 

I will defend all other people's religions and belief systems when I feel that an injustice is being done against them. However, I personally disapprove of all religions since I feel they are devised as a method of societal control and tyranny.

Yes, I did use birth control. No, I don't think all abortion is a sin. It wouldn't have ever been my personal choice but I do recognize that sometimes abortions are necessary.

.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

lilmizlayla said:


> a pagan comes to their defense..LOLOLOL.
> 
> I dont expect Catholics to defend whatever it is they do. where is the defense at? We all know what the church is about and what it supports....NO mystery THERE!!!!
> 
> Call it whatever you want..snobbery, ignorance..whatever. IGNORANT is what supports a church that still keeps a pedophile supporter as its leader.


Are you a Christian? I was just wondering where the Bible tells us it's ok to belittle another person because their beliefs are different than our own.


----------



## wifemommy (Jul 16, 2009)

Nature Lover thank you I truely appreciate your respect for others' beliefs. That is a good way to live your life with a positive example :goodjob:


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

This 'spin out', bashing, badmouthing, and in general disrespect towards other HUMAN BEINGS CREATED IN THE IMAGE OF GOD is EXACTLY why, I don't do 'religion'. Galatians 5 clearly shows us that religion, is bad, but Relationship, is good!!

Galatians 5:1-17

*Freedom in Christ*

1 It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery. 
2 Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. 
3 Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. 
4 You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. 
5 But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope. 
6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love. 
7 You were running a good race. Who cut in on you and kept you from obeying the truth? 
8 That kind of persuasion does not come from the one who calls you. 
9 &#8220;A little yeast works through the whole batch of dough.&#8221; 
10 I am confident in the Lord that you will take no other view. The one who is throwing you into confusion will pay the penalty, whoever he may be. 
11 Brothers, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been abolished. 
12 As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves! 
13 *You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love. 

14 The entire law is summed up in a single command: &#8220;Love your neighbor as yourself.*
*15 If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.* 

Galatians 5:16-26

16 So I say, live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature. 
17 For the *sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit*, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want. 
18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law. 
19 * The acts of the sinful nature are obvious*: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 
20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 
21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 
23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 
24 Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. 
25 Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. 
26 Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

naturelover said:


> Watcher, you directed the above question to me so I'm answering you.
> 
> I am not a Catholic. I am not a Christian. I believe in one God only but I don't adhere to any religion at all, and I don't believe Jesus or any other person was a god incarnate.


Now we see why they say you should never assume.




naturelover said:


> I believe all people have a right to worship any god of their choice as they see fit and


Same here. God gave us all free will to do what we wish. If He isn't willing to try to force someone to follow Him what in the world would make me think I should do it? 




naturelover said:


> I think other people should mind their own business without interfering or imposing their own beliefs on other people's worship and beliefs. I believe that all such misguided interference and imposition is a terrible sin.


Here I disagree a bit. As I have pointed out time and time again the Bible tells me I am to tell those I see not following God where they are missing the boat. Once I have shown them what they do with the information is out of my hands but I have done my job.

Let's take this out of the theological arena for a while. I think you would be willing to say you do not want others telling you what to do in your home. Now say you had a very well off neighbor who was 'huffing' paint. Would you just mind your own business or would you, at the very least, try to show him how dangerous it is?


----------



## momofseven (Oct 10, 2008)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> There are those that believe that God.... the guy that created the entire universe and everything in it.... needs your money. :shrug: Personally I think it will do a soul more good to take their money to Mickey D's and buy a burger for the homeless guy down the street.



And that my friend.... is the true definition of "works."


----------



## momofseven (Oct 10, 2008)

I believe that there is only one true church...and most of us would not recognize it if it landed square on our toes. it's the church of "love the Lord God with all your heart and your brother as yourself." It is made up of the body of Christ, and until He comes again it is invisible to the world. And most of the time it is invisible to even those that belong to it. It is difficult to see because of the very large beams in our eyes that obscure our vision when we "look" at one another. Instead we need to "look unto Jesus who is the author and finisher of our faith."


----------



## house06 (Jan 4, 2007)

so tell everyone how you "really" feel.! LOL


----------



## lilmizlayla (Aug 28, 2008)

georger said:


> Because people end up putting their beliefs in something that is invisible and can only be envisioned in the imagination, there is always the opportunity for corruption, for the greedy, unscrupulous shyster to come in and manipulate believers and be all "preachy" and put on a ----ed good show - all the while collecting a lot of money and leaving people ripped off and hoodwinked.
> 
> As long as the criteria for being a "believer" remains surrendering control of the individual human mind and independent critical thinking to the will of others, it remains a dangerous hellhole and I'll have no part of it, thank you.


the only will one should ever submit to, is God.. to put your total faith in man is silly. God isnt in the Churches anymore. you dont need anybody to tell you what God wants or needs from you. He tells you himself.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

I started this thread and I am leaving it. have fun slugging it out.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

watcher said:


> Now we see why they say you should never assume.
> Same here. God gave us all free will to do what we wish. If He isn't willing to try to force someone to follow Him what in the world would make me think I should do it?


Maybe the bible and the men who wrote the bible?



> _Here I disagree a bit. As I have pointed out time and time again the Bible tells me I am to tell those I see not following God where they are missing the boat. Once I have shown them what they do with the information is out of my hands but I have done my job._


Do you wait for them to ask you about it first? Or do you determine for yourself first that someone is not following God the way your bible says they should and then point out to them that they're not conforming? 

What about if the other person is obviously already really happy and successful with their own different religion and rituals? Would you ask them to tell you about their own religion? Would you still point out to them how they're not conforming with your god's laws according to your bible? Would you attempt to inform them without needing to rely and refer to your scriptures? Can you inspire them and speak the word of your god without it? 



> _Let's take this out of the theological arena for a while. I think you would be willing to say you do not want others telling you what to do in your home._
> 
> _Now say you had a very well off neighbor who was 'huffing' paint. Would you just mind your own business or would you, at the very least, try to show him how dangerous it is?_


It wouldn't matter to me if my neighbour was well off or not so I'm not sure what relevance that has to the question. Did you mention his personal wealth as an indication of his successful intelligence? 

I wouldn't mind my own business, I would ask him about it. Just as I would if he was partaking of any other hazardous substance. I wouldn't determine for myself first that it was dangerous without asking him why and how he does it and what pleasure or spiritual benefit he gets from it. Maybe the guy has a death wish and doesn't care that it could destroy him, maybe he's already dying and is trying to hasten his death. So I would want to ascertain his intentions and knowledge about it and his answers would then determine for me how dangerous it is and whether or not I should attempt to inform him about anything. I won't impose my own fears for his life or his spiritual salvation on him but if he wants to know what the hazards are then I will tell him.

Now I will tell you this about interference with a neighbour in the case of drugs and chemicals (and even religion) - if the neighbour's activities with chemicals (or religion) poses grave bodily harm to me and my other neighbours and he knows it then he is deliberately committing a crime against us. In such a case I wouldn't bother speaking with him about it any further, I'd report him to appropriate legal authorities to deal with it.

.


----------



## FeralFemale (Apr 10, 2006)

watcher said:


> Here I disagree a bit. As I have pointed out time and time again the Bible tells me I am to tell those I see not following God where they are missing the boat. Once I have shown them what they do with the information is out of my hands but I have done my job.
> 
> Let's take this out of the theological arena for a while. I think you would be willing to say you do not want others telling you what to do in your home. Now say you had a very well off neighbor who was 'huffing' paint. Would you just mind your own business or would you, at the very least, try to show him how dangerous it is?


I'm sorry, but do you realize how arrogant it is to assume that your way and belief is the best way and so you are obligated to tell me how I am not following God's Way? I know, I know...you are directed to do this by the Bible...

Now, just for the sake of debate, what if I, as a Catholic, think YOU are the one who is wrong? What if I were to tell you that since my religion was the first Christian religion, started by Jesus himself when he professed to Peter that he is the rock upon which He will build His Church, that YOU are actually the one who gets it wrong? Of course, I am just telling you that because I feel badly for you that you have been led so astray by heretics who turned away from the One True Faith....right? So that makes it ok, right? (Not.)

You don't need to feel badly or feel pity for me or any other faithful Catholic because you think -- or were told -- that we do not follow the Bible (as you and yours choose to interpret it). 

I'll tend my garden, you tend yours. That's a principle that this Country was founded on.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

naturelover said:


> Maybe the bible and the men who wrote the bible?


Then why did they put the little part about if someone doesn't want to do it you (I) should leave them alone if they hear the Word but don't want to follow it? I would think if they wanted us to force people to follow Him they would have left that out. Maybe put something in there like; if you go to their house and they don't want to hear kill them the move on.




naturelover said:


> Do you wait for them to ask you about it first? Or do you determine for yourself first that someone is not following God the way your bible says they should and then point out to them that they're not conforming?


Depends. If they claim to be a follower of Christ, i.e. a Christian, then I don't wait. I'm told to go to them. 

If they don't claim to be Christians it depends on more. I don't storm up to everyone I see doing something against the teachings of Christ and demand they repent or go to Hell. 

Let me ask you this. If you knew someone who was cheating on his wife would you wait for him to ask you or would you go to him and tell him what he's doing has a good chance of destroying his marriage and his family?




naturelover said:


> What about if the other person is obviously already really happy and successful with their own different religion and rituals? Would you ask them to tell you about their own religion?


Yep, BTDT. I'm willing to listen to them as long as they are willing to listen to me. I'm not so weak in my belief that I'm worried about them 'contaminating' me.




naturelover said:


> Would you still point out to them how they're not conforming with your god's laws according to your bible?


Yep, BTDT. 




naturelover said:


> Would you attempt to inform them without needing to rely and refer to your scriptures?


Yep, in a way. I'm very poor at quoting scriptures. Scriptures can very easily be twisted when taken out of context. I rely more on the Bible as a whole to show the heart of God.




naturelover said:


> Can you inspire them and speak the word of your god without it?


Yep. See above. 




naturelover said:


> It wouldn't matter to me if my neighbour was well off or not so I'm not sure what relevance that has to the question.


Simple, if he was not well off his addiction could lead to him becoming a "burden on society" which means your tax money might need to be spent on him. Once you start supporting someone you clearly have a right to have input on how he lives.




naturelover said:


> Did you mention his personal wealth as an indication of his successful intelligence?


Nope, see above.




naturelover said:


> I wouldn't mind my own business, I would ask him about it. Just as I would if he was partaking of any other hazardous substance. I wouldn't determine for myself first that it was dangerous without asking him why and how he does it and what pleasure or spiritual benefit he gets from it. Maybe the guy has a death wish and doesn't care that it could destroy him, maybe he's already dying and is trying to hasten his death. So I would want to ascertain his intentions and knowledge about it and his answers would then determine for me how dangerous it is and whether or not I should attempt to inform him about anything. I won't impose my own fears for his life or his spiritual salvation on him but if he wants to know what the hazards are then I will tell him.


I'm confused. . .Here is a guy not doing anything that affect you but you are willing to butt into his life? W=hat would you do when you discovered huffing can lead to sudden death and does lead to brain damage and he does it just because he likes it?




naturelover said:


> Now I will tell you this about interference with a neighbour in the case of drugs and chemicals (and even religion) - if the neighbour's activities with chemicals (or religion) poses grave bodily harm to me and my other neighbours and he knows it then he is deliberately committing a crime against us. In such a case I wouldn't bother speaking with him about it any further, I'd report him to appropriate legal authorities to deal with it.


Which is why I set up the analogy the way I did. Huffing poses no physical danger to you, huffers tend to be very passive and he has enough money to provide for himself w/o placing any kind of financial burden on anyone.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

FeralFemale said:


> I'm sorry, but do you realize how arrogant it is to assume that your way and belief is the best way and so you are obligated to tell me how I am not following God's Way? I know, I know...you are directed to do this by the Bible...



Its not arrogant at all. Its no more arrogant then me telling you about which political candidate I think you should vote for. I'm not going to demand nor force you to vote for my guy in the election. I have a belief which I think is the right one and in that belief I'm told I'm to tell others. If you have another, fine. Heck, if you think yours is better tell me about it I'll listen to you but you should be just as willing to listen to me.




FeralFemale said:


> Now, just for the sake of debate, what if I, as a Catholic, think YOU are the one who is wrong?


The we debate, nice and civil. And as I have pointed out, I'm not going to try to force you to believe the way I do. I'm not the greatest in putting things into words so don't take this too literally, I don't really care what you believe. I only care they you have the opportunity to hear, what you do after you hear is totally up to you. If hearing what I have to say upsets you then you might want to ask yourself "Why?". 




FeralFemale said:


> What if I were to tell you that since my religion was the first Christian religion, started by Jesus himself when he professed to Peter that he is the rock upon which He will build His Church, that YOU are actually the one who gets it wrong? Of course, I am just telling you that because I feel badly for you that you have been led so astray by heretics who turned away from the One True Faith....right? So that makes it ok, right? (Not.)


I'd have to ask you to provide support in scriptures for the beliefs you follow and to refute my supporting scriptures for my beliefs and the ones contradict what I see as failings/bad teachings in yours. Just as I would and do for anyone else who says they are a Christian.

But I'd listen as long as you were willing to listen to me. That's the great thing about Christianity, the Bible tells us directly if someone doesn't want to hear we are to just say OK an walk away. No forcing them to believe, no yelling and screaming, no arguments, just walk away.




FeralFemale said:


> You don't need to feel badly or feel pity for me or any other faithful Catholic because you think -- or were told -- that we do not follow the Bible (as you and yours choose to interpret it).



I don't. I also don't feel badly nor feel pity for those who choose to not make any attempt to follow God's teachings. You, and they, make your choice with your own free will. Its you who will have to stand before God and answer for those choices. I'll have to stand before Him and answer for mine. But I don't want to stand before Him and have Him ask me why I didn't follow His word and tell those people about His teachings and where they were not following them.




FeralFemale said:


> I'll tend my garden, you tend yours. That's a principle that this Country was founded on.


Actually it was founded on allowing your neighbor to have a garden but being willing to offer advice. If you lived in Maine and your neighbor said he was going to spend his life savings to buy banana trees to grow bananas in his garden would you not offer the advice that bananas would probably not grow in Maine and he'd be wasting his money? Or would you just stand back and watch him fail? 

Now don't you think a person's soul is a bit more important than a garden? If so don't you think you should tell them when you think they are making a mistake?


----------



## FeralFemale (Apr 10, 2006)

Watcher, you just proved my point. Thanks.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

watcher said:


> Then why did they put the little part about if someone doesn't want to do it you (I) should leave them alone if they hear the Word but don't want to follow it? I would think if they wanted us to force people to follow Him they would have left that out. Maybe put something in there like; if you go to their house and they don't want to hear kill them the move on.


I think it says in there if other people don't want to follow what your bible says they should do then you are supposed to shake off the dust from your own feet and put those people behind you, to shun them and not have anything more to do with them. Correct me if I'm wrong about that. If that is true then that is ostracizing them for not conforming to your religious imperatives. I guess if you feel that strongly about going by the imperatives of your book then you ostracizing someone and ostracizing yourself from them is better for them rather than you condemning them to death.

Personally I would prefer to just not talk with my friends and neighbours about religion than to be compelled to ostracize them (and thereby ostracize myself from them) just because they don't conform to my spiritual beliefs or what my own arcanum says to me. If I was compelled to ostracize people who don't believe the same way as me I would have no friends at all and I'd have to shun every one of my neighbours.

My arcanum is different from your bible and it has different laws. It doesn't control my life and I have a choice of using it as a guide if I wish. I don't rely on it to tell me how to lead my life and it doesn't objectify my worship or devotion for me. It doesn't compell me to point out other people's spiritual or religious 'infractions' and it doesn't compell me to ostracize or condemn people because they have different beliefs from me or don't conform to the guidance of the arcanum. I can understand that your bible is that important to you but I don't have to relate to it nor relate to the things it tells you to do. Granted there are a lot of sensible laws in your bible but there are also some scriptures there that don't make sense to me or that I find to be entirely too controlling and oppressive for my own spiritual comfort. 

I DO very much like Jesus' sermon on the mount though. 



> Let me ask you this. If you knew someone who was cheating on his wife would you wait for him to ask you or would you go to him and tell him what he's doing has a good chance of destroying his marriage and his family?


Any guy who is cheating on his wife already knows that what he's doing could destroy his marriage. He doesn't need me to tell him what he already knows and it's not my place to impose my morals on him. If what he's doing is clearly causing harm to his wife - you know, like if it's taking food and essentials away from his family, or if he's whoring around and she's at risk of getting VD or crabs or some other pestilence from him - I'd be more inclined to go talk to his wife about it instead. 




> Simple, if he was not well off his addiction could lead to him becoming a "burden on society" which means your tax money might need to be spent on him. Once you start supporting someone you clearly have a right to have input on how he lives.


Everybody who has any kind of addiction becomes a burden on society one way or another, it makes no difference if they're wealthy or poor. Even people who are not addicts are still burdens on society. We are all social burdens on each other from the day we're born to the day we die. However, I don't think that addictions have anything to do with religion or self-imposed religious responsibilities. Addiction is a social problem and to some extents it can be a spiritual problem for the addict but it's not a religious problem and not particularly a moral problem. Other people's addictions does not grant me the right to have input about their lifestyles. 



> I'm confused. . .Here is a guy not doing anything that affect you but you are willing to butt into his life? What would you do when you discovered huffing can lead to sudden death and does lead to brain damage and he does it just because he likes it?


I didn't say I would butt into his life. I said I would ask him about his habit and what he gets out of it. I'm curious about people, I like to know what makes them tick. If the guy likes it and is intent on self destruction with it that is his perogative and I'm not going to try to stop him. His chosen lifestyle and his spiritual salvation is not my responsibility. However, if he does not want to self destruct and tells me he wants help with kicking his habit then I would try to encourage and help him but I wouldn't try to impose my own beliefs on him.

.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

Here is what I wish: I wish religious groups could be content with enforcing and policing their rules within their own religious communities, rather than trying to have them incorporated into secular law that affects the rest of us.

If you believe people shouldn't be allowed to drink alcohol, or look at certain images, or buy alcohol on Sunday, or have abortions, or use birth control, or go out in public without a burkha -- that's fine with me, as long as you stick to enforcing those rules only within your group of like-minded believers. If people wish to willingly submit to those rules, more power to them! And you are free to chastise or ostracize fellow believers who step over the line. _Just leave the rest of us alone, to do as we see fit._ Thank you!


----------



## Ohiogal (Mar 15, 2007)

The problem with that, Willowgirl, is that others _doing as they see fit_ impact the church goers, who have to by civil law pay their tax money for others _doing as they see fit_. Now if those _doing as they see fit_ want to continue to have treatment for alcohol and drug addiction, domestic abuse, abortions, etc, and *fund it themselves* then by all means _do as you see fit_ Especially since its well known that most of these behaviors are damanging not only to the people involved, but others around them.

Just don't expect the rest of us to pay for it!


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

Hmm, I dunno, but in my family there were plenty of chubby Southern Baptists who liked to go to the Golden Corrall or Old Country Buffet after Sunday services ... does this mean I should be exempted from paying for their bypasses and diabetes medications? 

Where does it end?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

FeralFemale said:


> Watcher, you just proved my point. Thanks.


Please tell me how its arrogant for me to express my opinion.

BTW, why did you not respond to my post? I put time and effort into a post in an attempt to understand your view point and so you can understand mine. When someone snipes and moves on I have to wonder why. I usually assume one of two things. 1) They can't counter my arguments/facts. But that doesn't really apply here because I didn't really post any. or 2) My post hit a nerve and they would rather run away than face it. But that doesn't really apply here because you seem well founded in your belief.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

naturelover said:


> I think it says in there if other people don't want to follow what your bible says they should do then you are supposed to shake off the dust from your own feet and put those people behind you, to shun them and not have anything more to do with them. Correct me if I'm wrong about that. If that is true then that is ostracizing them for not conforming to your religious imperatives. I guess if you feel that strongly about going by the imperatives of your book then you ostracizing someone and ostracizing yourself from them is better for them rather than you condemning them to death.


That's not in my Bible. If someone doesn't want to want to hear you are to just move on. There is nothing which says you are to have nothing to do with them ever again. It doesn't even say you are to never try to reach them again. Even when we see some one who claims to be a Christian sinning we are not told to ostracize them. We are just told to treat them as we would any other non-saved person.




naturelover said:


> My arcanum is different from your bible and it has different laws. It doesn't control my life and I have a choice of using it as a guide if I wish. I don't rely on it to tell me how to lead my life and it doesn't objectify my worship or devotion for me. It doesn't compell me to point out other people's spiritual or religious 'infractions' and it doesn't compell me to ostracize or condemn people because they have different beliefs from me or don't conform to the guidance of the arcanum. I can understand that your bible is that important to you but I don't have to relate to it nor relate to the things it tells you to do. Granted there are a lot of sensible laws in your bible but there are also some scriptures there that don't make sense to me or that I find to be entirely too controlling and oppressive for my own spiritual comfort.


Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind and Love your neighbor as yourself. Yeah, really controlling and oppressive. Ok, that was a bit snippy but I'm going to leave it here to make a point.





naturelover said:


> Any guy who is cheating on his wife already knows that what he's doing could destroy his marriage. He doesn't need me to tell him what he already knows and it's not my place to impose my morals on him. If what he's doing is clearly causing harm to his wife - you know, like if it's taking food and essentials away from his family, or if he's whoring around and she's at risk of getting VD or crabs or some other pestilence from him - I'd be more inclined to go talk to his wife about it instead.


A drug addict knows the dangers as well but sometimes if some takes the time to sit down and talk to them about it they will 'see the light' and start turning their lives around. Its commonly referred to as an intervention.

It may not work, to be honest with you it usually _doesn't_ work, but by not stepping out and trying you are guaranteeing the action will not stop.




naturelover said:


> Everybody who has any kind of addiction becomes a burden on society one way or another, it makes no difference if they're wealthy or poor. Even people who are not addicts are still burdens on society. We are all social burdens on each other from the day we're born to the day we die. However, I don't think that addictions have anything to do with religion or self-imposed religious responsibilities. Addiction is a social problem and to some extents it can be a spiritual problem for the addict but it's not a religious problem and not particularly a moral problem. Other people's addictions does not grant me the right to have input about their lifestyles.


I'm still confused. Would you try to help him or just let him keep on huffing even though you know its most likely going to kill him?





naturelover said:


> I didn't say I would butt into his life. I said I would ask him about his habit and what he gets out of it. I'm curious about people, I like to know what makes them tick. If the guy likes it and is intent on self destruction with it that is his perogative and I'm not going to try to stop him. His chosen lifestyle and his spiritual salvation is not my responsibility. However, if he does not want to self destruct and tells me he wants help with kicking his habit then I would try to encourage and help him but I wouldn't try to impose my own beliefs on him.


Hum. . .isn't that the *same thing I have been saying* about how I lead my life? I have said over and over and over and over I have no mandate nor desire to impost my beliefs on anyone.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

willow_girl said:


> Here is what I wish: I wish religious groups could be content with enforcing and policing their rules within their own religious communities, rather than trying to have them incorporated into secular law that affects the rest of us.
> 
> If you believe people shouldn't be allowed to drink alcohol, or look at certain images, or buy alcohol on Sunday, or have abortions, or use birth control, or go out in public without a burkha -- that's fine with me, as long as you stick to enforcing those rules only within your group of like-minded believers. If people wish to willingly submit to those rules, more power to them! And you are free to chastise or ostracize fellow believers who step over the line. _Just leave the rest of us alone, to do as we see fit._ Thank you!


Here's a near perfect example of what I'm talking about; the people you are talking about. It is against Christ's teachings to force those teachings and/or beliefs on those who do not wish to follow them. Anyone who takes the time to study the Bible should know that. The problem is most people who claim to be Christians don't. They rely on what someone else says is in there, IOW they are following the teachings of a man.

And another thing. Anyone with an IQ over 15 should know you can't force someone to believe anything (something?). You can force them, to a point, to act a certain way. I use the example of a parent forcing one kid to tell another kid he's sorry. You can force him to say the words but you and the other kid knows he isn't really sorry. 

Now let me ask you this. If I see someone doing this would you rather I just ignore it and let them live their lives the way they wish or would you like it if I pointed out to them where their teachings are not in line with what's in the Bible?


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

willow_girl said:


> Hmm, I dunno, but in my family there were plenty of chubby Southern Baptists who liked to go to the Golden Corrall or Old Country Buffet after Sunday services ... does this mean I should be exempted from paying for their bypasses and diabetes medications?
> 
> Where does it end?


Hold your breath love.......

I totally agree with you.
No ma'am you should not have to pay for some chubby _____ (insert religious sect) bypass.
You eat right, take care of yourself, and why in the world should you have to pay for ANYONE'S ignorance?

I also agree, that all of those 'moral' health issues (abortion, gluttony, smokers, etc) should have to fund their own way. 
Here in IN the governor passed a bill saying that NO MORE state funds would go to planned parenthood. The tax payers spoke, he listened.
PP went ape spit and filed an injunction.
Judge, denied.
So PP gets on TV and radio and moans and whines "ooooo womens health" bla bla bla.......mean old mitch bla bla bla.
And you know what happened?
PP was FLOODED with PERSONAL checks, to keep them 'afloat'.
PP rep was "stunned, amazed and grateful" (her words) at the OUTPOURING of support.

Excellent.
If folks want to donate money to PP, let them. It's their money, they earned it, they can do with it what they choose.
This is the RIGHT way to do it.
If the PUBLIC wants it, they can pay for it, but if the PUBLIC doesn't want it, they shouldn't have to pay for it.

I am gonna also agree with this:



> If you believe people shouldn't be allowed to drink alcohol, or look at certain images, or buy alcohol on Sunday, or have abortions, or use birth control, or go out in public without a burkha -- that's fine with me, as long as you stick to enforcing those rules only within your group of like-minded believers. If people wish to willingly submit to those rules, more power to them! *And you are free to chastise or ostracize fellow believers who step over the line*. _Just leave the rest of us alone, to do as we see fit._ Thank you!


What is in bold, is Biblical!!

1Corinthians 5:12
What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside.

Believers are called to share, that's it.
It's up the the listener to decide.
Simple as that.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> And another thing. Anyone with an IQ over 15 should know you can't force someone to believe anything (something?). You can force them, to a point, to act a certain way. I use the example of a parent forcing one kid to tell another kid he's sorry. You can force him to say the words but you and the other kid knows he isn't really sorry.


I'm not positive the intention of the "blue laws" was to force nonbelievers to behave. I think it's just as likely that believers in high places concluded that if they took away all the other fun options -- like going to the bar, or shopping for a used car -- people would be more likely to attend church on Sunday. Unfortunately, the rest of us -- who wouldn't be attending church at any rate! -- also are inconvenienced. 

Also, (taking up Ohiogal's argument again -- my husband interrupted me earlier) the blue laws mentioned above really don't prevent people from engaging in destructive (or self-destructive) behavior. A Bloody Mary on Tuesday morning is perfectly legal, and no more harmful than one consumed with Sunday brunch. And shopping for a car isn't harmful in any case (except perhaps to one's wallet, ouch!). These laws are merely intended to enforce a particular religion, and thus ought to be scrapped, IMO. If churches can't persuade their members to attend services, it shouldn't be the sheriff's job to compel them (or at least to remove the more attractive alternatives).



> Now let me ask you this. If I see someone doing this would you rather I just ignore it and let them live their lives the way they wish or would you like it if I pointed out to them where their teachings are not in line with what's in the Bible?


I'm not the one who had a problem with that. Actually, I'm rather fond of free speech, so I would say it's your prerogative to express your opinion.

My only caveat would be to remind you that Paul says in Corinthians that unless a thing is done out of love, it's worse than useless (my paraphrase). If you're sharing your convictions with a family member, your motivations might be pure (and therefore useful), but if you're spouting off to a stranger, I highly suspect you are not motivated by love, but by something else entirely ... in which case, it might be better to "save your breath for cooling your oatmeal," as a woman I once knew used to say.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> Hold your breath love.......
> 
> I totally agree with you.
> No ma'am you should not have to pay for some chubby _____ (insert religious sect) bypass.
> You eat right, take care of yourself, and why in the world should you have to pay for ANYONE'S ignorance?


I don't know. If we start denying benefits to some, where does it end? Can I argue that I shouldn't have to pay for a skier's broken leg, because he was engaging in a behavior known to be risky? What about the pedestrian who merely slipped and fell on some ice? Ahh, but he should have known that walking might be treacherous. 

Or say a woman develops cervical cancer due to HPV, which is spread by sexual contact. Should she be denied treatment, because she should have known better than to have unprotected sex? But what if she insists she was a virgin when she married and has only been with one man and they were trying to make a baby? Does she get radiation or not?

I think most of us engage in risky behavior of some sort, and want our particular risks to be covered, although we probably would be happy to deny coverage to people who take risks that we don't.


----------



## FeralFemale (Apr 10, 2006)

watcher said:


> Please tell me how its arrogant for me to express my opinion.
> 
> BTW, why did you not respond to my post? I put time and effort into a post in an attempt to understand your view point and so you can understand mine. When someone snipes and moves on I have to wonder why. I usually assume one of two things. 1) They can't counter my arguments/facts. But that doesn't really apply here because I didn't really post any. or 2) My post hit a nerve and they would rather run away than face it. But that doesn't really apply here because you seem well founded in your belief.


Or, 3, it's not worth the time or effort to try reply to someone who has it so wrong and believes it so much.


----------



## Ohiogal (Mar 15, 2007)

The skiers broken leg, as was the pedestrian falling, an accident. Having an abortion is no accident. Smoking for 30 years and getting lung cancer is no accident. These are decisions that are made - right or wrong. It just so happens that in some cases, the public does not want to pay for those decisions.
The last time I checked, if you get private life insurance, there is a rider on it that states that any 'risky' behavior is not covered. The last policy I looked at listed things like sky diving, horse back riding and white water rafting. Apparently they do expect people to pay for their own indiscretions if its a choice rather than an accident. All those listed above were 'non covered' exclusions to coverage and in fact, guaranteed 100% none coverage if it was determined that was the cause of death.
So there are already lines being drawn, and it isn't subjective. In some cases there is a moral basis, as because without morals we would not have an orderly society. So some rules DO apply.
I suggest to anyone who _does whatever they want_ with their body to remember they only have one body, one life. And that no one else is responsible for paying to patch them up.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

willow_girl said:


> I'm not the one who had a problem with that. Actually, I'm rather fond of free speech, so I would say it's your prerogative to express your opinion.
> 
> My only caveat would be to remind you that Paul says in Corinthians that unless a thing is done out of love, it's worse than useless (my paraphrase). If



Yep, as my pastor puts it; truth without love is legalism. 




willow_girl said:


> you're sharing your convictions with a family member, your motivations might be pure (and therefore useful), but if you're spouting off to a stranger, I highly suspect you are not motivated by love, but by something else entirely ... in which case, it might be better to "save your breath for cooling your oatmeal," as a woman I once knew used to say.


As I said, I don't go around running up to people pointing out where they are failing but neither do I just ignore it when I have a chance.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

FeralFemale said:


> Or, 3, it's not worth the time or effort to try reply to someone who has it so wrong and believes it so much.


If that were the fact I'd think you'd post something showing how I'm wrong. I have proven over and over I'm willing to listen to/read the views of others.

BTW, where am I wrong? Do you think I'm wrong when I say as a Christian I'm told to spread the Word of Christ? Do you thing I'm wrong when I say I'm told to point out to people who claim to be followers of Christ if I think they are falling short of His teachings?


----------



## FeralFemale (Apr 10, 2006)

watcher said:


> If that were the fact I'd think you'd post something showing how I'm wrong. I have proven over and over I'm willing to listen to/read the views of others.
> 
> BTW, where am I wrong? Do you think I'm wrong when I say as a Christian I'm told to spread the Word of Christ? Do you thing I'm wrong when I say I'm told to point out to people who claim to be followers of Christ if I think they are falling short of His teachings?


You are wrong in having the unmitigated gall to decide I am 'falling short of His teachings'. Who are you to claim such a thing?

Feel free to spread the Word of Christ, but don't you DARE insult my Christianity based on nothing more than your opinion as to how I should or should not worship Him.

I'm sorry but that is complete and utter arrogance on you part.


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

watcher said:


> I'm still confused. Would you try to help him or just let him keep on huffing even though you know its most likely going to kill him?


Watcher, it looks like she already did answer your question and maybe you misunderstood it?



> Originally Posted by *naturelover*
> 
> _I didn't say I would butt into his life. I said I would ask him about his habit and what he gets out of it. I'm curious about people, I like to know what makes them tick. If the guy likes it and is intent on self destruction with it that is his perogative and I'm not going to try to stop him. His chosen lifestyle and his spiritual salvation is not my responsibility. However, if he does not want to self destruct and tells me he wants help with kicking his habit then I would try to encourage and help him but I wouldn't try to impose my own beliefs on him._


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Ohiogal said:


> The skiers broken leg, as was the pedestrian falling, an accident. Having an abortion is no accident. Smoking for 30 years and getting lung cancer is no accident. These are decisions that are made - right or wrong. It just so happens that in some cases, the public does not want to pay for those decisions.
> The last time I checked, if you get private life insurance, there is a rider on it that states that any 'risky' behavior is not covered. The last policy I looked at listed things like sky diving, horse back riding and white water rafting. Apparently they do expect people to pay for their own indiscretions if its a choice rather than an accident. All those listed above were 'non covered' exclusions to coverage and in fact, guaranteed 100% none coverage if it was determined that was the cause of death.
> So there are already lines being drawn, and it isn't subjective. In some cases there is a moral basis, as because without morals we would not have an orderly society. So some rules DO apply.
> I suggest to anyone who _does whatever they want_ with their body to remember they only have one body, one life. And that no one else is responsible for paying to patch them up.


Well said lady!


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

FeralFemale said:


> You are wrong in having the unmitigated gall to decide I am 'falling short of His teachings'. Who are you to claim such a thing?


A saved sinner who reads, studies and does his best to live by the Word is who I am. BTW, I don't recall saying you have fallen short, other than the fact we all fall short because none of us are perfect. Or are you claiming you are perfect and live totally up to God's expectations each and every day? Now to me THAT would be arrogant.




FeralFemale said:


> Feel free to spread the Word of Christ, but don't you DARE insult my Christianity based on nothing more than your opinion as to how I should or should not worship Him.


Where have I done that?

But. . . There are things which are opinions. Alcohol is the best example. If you fell its wrong for you to drink then its wrong for you to drink but if I feel its not wrong for me to then its not wrong for me. But there are things which are not opinions because it is clearly stated in the Bible. Adultery is wrong and it doesn't matter how you feel about it.




FeralFemale said:


> I'm sorry but that is complete and utter arrogance on you part.


Again no more so than me trying to tell you how you should vote. Its my POV nothing more. If you have a different one, fine. When religious views are brought up you can bet I'm going to bring mine up and compare mine to yours. The very same way I would if we were talking politics, I'd bring up the guy or policies I think are right and compare them to yours. 

Why would the fact your views on how to worship don't line up with mine bother you? Would you get upset if I said your political views were wrong or would you just say "what ever"? 

So am I arrogant if I tell you I think the guy you support for office is the wrong one or your political view is wrong? If not then I ask again why am I considered arrogant when I do the same thing with religion?


----------



## Energy Rebel (Jan 22, 2011)

Originally Posted by naturelover 
I think it says in there if other people don't want to follow what your bible says they should do then you are supposed to shake off the dust from your own feet and put those people behind you, to shun them and not have anything more to do with them. Correct me if I'm wrong about that. If that is true then that is ostracizing them for not conforming to your religious imperatives. I guess if you feel that strongly about going by the imperatives of your book then you ostracizing someone and ostracizing yourself from them is better for them rather than you condemning them to death.





watcher said:


> That's not in my Bible. If someone doesn't want to want to hear you are to just move on. There is nothing which says you are to have nothing to do with them ever again. It doesn't even say you are to never try to reach them again. Even when we see some one who claims to be a Christian sinning we are not told to ostracize them. We are just told to treat them as we would any other non-saved person.



NL was indeed correct.
Matthew 10:14

King James Bible
And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet


Oh, and BTW, those are red letters in my Bible.........


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

Yes, that is in the bible and if you were to do a full research on the proper interpretation of the biblical term to "shake off the dust from your feet", even from the NT you will find that it means it is casting a curse on those who won't hear. In the very least it means you must ostracize them as rubbish or filth and are never to return to them, and in the very most extreme it means that not only must you ostracize them, you are also judging and casting a curse on them as being of even less worth than the people in the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha.

Check it out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaking_the_dust_from_the_feet 

To be fair, according to wikipedia, it does say there


> In the early Latter Day Saint movement of the 19th century, it was practiced much as recorded in the New Testament, but later fell out of use. Other Christian groups and organizations typically do not see this as a practice that should be followed, or as something not to be taken literally.


However, I have seen some people openly post it as a literal curse right here on this board at other people they were angry with so I know that there are still some people who do take the curse literally. As a matter of fact, one frustrated person in particular has cursed me thusly on this board on more than one occasion but has still come back to respond to me with further diatribes and rantings on later occasions. So much for being ignored. :hysterical: 

.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

And Watcher, I want you to know that I like you and I think you're a good hearted person with good intentions, so I'm not picking on you or trying to admonish you when I say this to you - but you have used that term yourself in this topic and to be fair to YOU I think perhaps you used it not knowing what it really means (it is a very serious curse). My reason for pointing this out is because if there is this one instruction in your bible that you didn't fully understand or misinterpreted the true meaning of it to suit your own ideals, then I think you should consider there is the possibility that there's also other instructions in your bible that you don't understand or have misinterpreted. If that is the case then until you yourself fully understand all of the instructions in your bible you aren't in a position to judge whether or not other people (including other Christian denominations) are truly hearing and conforming to God's word as instructed in the bible and hence you're not in a position to lead them. Sometimes it is better to keep your own counsel to yourself and let other people keep to their own counsel without making judgement on them according to what you think you understand about God's word.



watcher said:


> ..... I do this because I'm told to. I'm also told if after I have shown them this it is up to them to make the next move. If they are receptive I'm to try to lead them. If they are not receptive I'm to depart and 'shake off the dust of your feet'. IOW just walk away, not stand there and pound them over and over.


.


----------



## Energy Rebel (Jan 22, 2011)

The Mormons apparently added a curse to it, but I'm not sure that went with this Hebraism.
I do know that anything to do with the shoes or feet in the Middle East and across Asia carries an unclean connotation.
In the Arab world it is an insult to hit someone with your shoes.
I don't think Christ's instruction came with a curse, though.
An admonition perhaps, but since He is the only one qualified to judge, and He clearly stated that was not His mission on His first advent, no one can pass judgement at this time.
That will come at the end of the millennium when all have had a chance to accept.
There was also an interpretation relating to Christ's instructions that His apostles were not to go out as beggars. They were to earn their room and board. Paul for instance was a tentmaker.
In this respect, they were to not even take the dust of that town with them when they left.

There's another partially told story in the gospels about the woman about to be stoned for adultery.
When they brought her to Him and asked what was to be done with her, He drew something in the sand.
When He was done, He asked the woman where her accusers were and she said they're gone.
And you probably know the end of the story.
What isn't written (I think it's in one of the Apocrypha books) is WHAT He wrote in the sand.
It's said He was writing the sins of the men who came to stone her, probably with details only He would know. One by one they left, ashamed.

My point is, I'm sorry you've felt judged, as none of us are worthy to do that.
I had purposely avoided posting on this thread to begin with. I do so now, only to offer a minor correction in scripture and hopefully follow His instructions on how to treat others.

It ain't easy. Ya gotta admit, He's a hard act to follow.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

Energy Rebel said:


> My point is, I'm sorry you've felt judged, as none of us are worthy to do that.


I don't feel judged. I think some others have felt judged though. It's good of you to point out that nobody is worthy to do that.

.


----------



## DJ in WA (Jan 28, 2005)

I just scanned this thread and again feel grateful to have given up organized religion.

Life sure is simpler without trying to figure out what god supposedly thinks and who is right.

I think he'd be happy if I'm just doing what I enjoy while not hurting others.


----------



## lilmizlayla (Aug 28, 2008)

we may not know the perfect way..but we know the wrong way. Jesus just wants most to use the brains they gave them. so many lost souls..sigh.. Many churches spoon feed their followers..they dont know to think for themselves..they were never allowed to. they worship the men they are told were the chosen ones...instead of Christ. 
shame so many are led astray to burn in eternity


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

DJ in WA said:


> I just scanned this thread and again feel grateful to have given up organized religion.
> 
> Life sure is simpler without trying to figure out what god supposedly thinks and who is right.
> 
> I think he'd be happy if I'm just doing what I enjoy while not hurting others.


Amen. 86 religion, stick with The Word!!


----------



## lilmizlayla (Aug 28, 2008)

naturelover said:


> I think some others have felt judged though. It's good of you to point out that nobody is worthy to do that.
> 
> .


if people are secure in their relationship with Christ, it would not matter what others thought. Christ was judged also. He didnt whine and cry about it.
so the question is....do people care about being a good Christian..or just appearing to be one?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Energy Rebel said:


> Originally Posted by naturelover
> I think it says in there if other people don't want to follow what your bible says they should do then you are supposed to shake off the dust from your own feet and put those people behind you, to shun them and not have anything more to do with them. Correct me if I'm wrong about that. If that is true then that is ostracizing them for not conforming to your religious imperatives. I guess if you feel that strongly about going by the imperatives of your book then you ostracizing someone and ostracizing yourself from them is better for them rather than you condemning them to death.
> 
> 
> ...


This is where interpretation comes in. It says you are to leave if they don't wish to hear what you say. It says NOTHING about not going back at another time nor shunning. As I have studied the Bible as a whole I have discovered a few things. One, God wants us to act like Him; two, He would like for everyone to come to Him and three, He does not give a person a chance and if they don't take that one chance He then leaves them and shuns them forever and ever after that. 

To me to show someone the Word one time and shun them forever if they don't accept it RIGHT NOW would be not be any where near Christ like. 

Is my view right? For me it is but if you feel differently I'm not going to say "You are wrong and therefore are a sinner on the broad path to Hell!!!". I'm going to see if you are willing to discuss our views and we can use different scriptures to support our interpretation of this. If you are not willing I'll just agree to disagree and move on.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

naturelover said:


> And Watcher, I want you to know that I like you and I think you're a good hearted person with good intentions, so I'm not picking on you or trying to admonish you when I say this to you - but you have used that term yourself in this topic and to be fair to YOU I think perhaps you used it not knowing what it really means (it is a very serious curse). My reason for pointing this out is because if there is this one instruction in your bible that you didn't fully understand or misinterpreted the true meaning of it to suit your own ideals, then I think you should consider there is the possibility that there's also other instructions in your bible that you don't understand or have misinterpreted. If that is the case then until you yourself fully understand all of the instructions in your bible you aren't in a position to judge whether or not other people (including other Christian denominations) are truly hearing and conforming to God's word as instructed in the bible and hence you're not in a position to lead them. Sometimes it is better to keep your own counsel to yourself and let other people keep to their own counsel without making judgement on them according to what you think you understand about God's word.
> 
> 
> 
> .


I think to take the term literally is a mistake. Christ said He was a door, do we take that to mean he had a knob and hinges? As I pointed out in another msg taking the term literally would mean a person would only have ONE chance to hear the Word. Take it now or you go to Hell. That is not the nature of God as most people who have studied His Word a lot more than I have see it.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

DJ in WA said:


> I just scanned this thread and again feel grateful to have given up organized religion.
> 
> Life sure is simpler without trying to figure out what god supposedly thinks and who is right.
> 
> I think he'd be happy if I'm just doing what I enjoy while not hurting others.


All of that depends on how you define "organized religion". Remember in Hebrews 10:24-25 we are told we should not give up meeting together because we can help one another.

_And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds, not giving up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but encouraging one anotherâand all the more as you see the Day approaching. _

Do we need to have a organized church with rules and regulations, outside of what's in the Word, which you must follow? No, DUH! But it is good to have fellow believers who can encourage you, lift you up in prayer and give you insight which you yourself might not have. And you can to the same for them.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Here's something we showed in church last Sunday which helps to show what we believe and something we follow in actions and not just words. Its about 2 mins long. 

http://www.worshiphousemedia.com/mini-movies/23048/Welcome-To-Our-Church-2011

I have another which I think is good which we have shown. It makes you think about just where you and your church is. This one is just over 2 mins.

http://www.ignitermedia.com/mini-movies/884/Cruise-Ship-Vs-Battleship

How about ya'll take a few mins and watch them then tell me what you think?


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

I'm going to throw some ideas out here about this interpretation of "shake the dust off of your feet" that comes from my "little s spirit"

first off naturelover, I just wanted to point out that the wikipedia page was written with a Mormon emphasis(ie most real estate was taken up by Mormon stuff). I was raised in a evangelical(or more exactly wesleyan/holiness)church and was never taught the "deep cursing" aspect. Though the shaking of the feet was interpreted as applying to non-believers who reject the gospel. But I disagree with that application derived from those verses.

First off, Yes, this was Jesus speaking to his disciples. He was sending them out to offer the gospel (first)to the JEWS. Jesus was the Messiah, fulfilling the Jewish prophecy etc. The gospel is this good news that Jesus is the Messiah and has come to set the bound free. This was not the Sermon on the Mount, where he was speaking to "everyman". He was speaking to the disciples--specific individuals, giving them a task and directions on how to carry it out.

The disciples were sent to the Jews FIRST because Jesus was the Jewish messiah(and for all the world as well). The Jews were taught about the Messiah, and were supposed to be awaiting the Messiah, and how to know the Messiah. Well, here IS the Messiah. The Jews should "know better" in recognizing the Messiah because they have been prepared. If their hearts were not in the right place looking for the Messiah, and they are unable to recognize him, then they get the shaking feet treatment, as a message they have unclean hearts(and they did not have pure religious motives). After the Jews were told, then the discples and Paul and Barnabas moved onto the Gentiles(who the Jews considered unclean).

As far I can find reading around quickly I don't see where the dust shaking off applies to the GENTILES(basic non-believer). IE, the gesture has meaning for the Jews--"he that hates me hates the One who sent me", the idea being if they reject Jesus they do not have God's heart in them(and then there is the whole clean/unclean things in the Jewish observance).

SO to get an application out of the idea of shaking the dust, the only thing I can come up with is doing that with folks who should "know better", ie Christians who act like Pharisees, self righteous, haughty, prideful, and hard hearted. Jesus said the Pharisees were "unwashed tombs"--just about the most unclean thing to a Jewish person. THe only person Jesus ever shook his dust at were the Pharisees.

The shaking of the dust also doesn't follow through with other things Jesus said(or other NT), like always have an answer ready for your faith, be longsuffering, care for the widow and orphan, visit the prisoners, always hope for the best. I dont' think there's any precedent for "drive-by" witnessing in the Bible. Jesus says he stands at the door and knocks. And keeps knocking. He's pretty clear about not hiding our light either, which I could expand to include that it doesn't mean if someone doesn't like it we pick up our toys and go home.

Yes, I always feel real uncomfortable when a believer says to a non-believer (in so many words) "I shake your dust off and I'm moving on". There's something inherantly wrong about that(in "light" of Jesus's life and example), and now I understand that a little better, thank you.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

I hope I haven't ticked off Jewish people...but that is what is there in the New Testament


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

Gosh, I can barely believe I'm doing this. I don't think I've ever quoted a scripture here before in any of these types of discussions. Whatever is the world coming to?

_"Whatever town or village you enter, search for some worthy person there and stay at his house until you leave. _

_As you enter the home, give it your greeting_. _If the home is deserving, let your peace rest on it; if it is not, let your peace return to you. _

_If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town. _

_I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgement than for this town. _

_I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. _

_Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves. _

_Matthew 10:11-16"_

Look, speaking from the more or less impartial view point of a non-Christian, non-Jew, non-gentile, non-'anything definable' person, that above directive was not just intended for treatment towards Jews, it was intended for anyone who won't accept the man Jesus as their god. It may have been his original disciples that he laid the directive upon, but it was with the full intention that the same directive would be laid upon all other future disciples and believers and that has become the directive laid upon Christian believers over the past 1,900 years.

- Find a worthy person? By whose criteria is a person judged worthy?

- If the home is deserving, bless it with peace. If it isn't deemed deserving take your peace blessing back. Why take back a peace blessing once given? By whose criteria is the home judged deserving of a peace blessing? Shouldn't ALL homes and towns be deserving of a peace blessing?

- If anyone will not listen to (obey) the directive then shake their filth off your feet and shun the town. Condemn it to a fate worse than the fate of Sodom and Gomorrha. All because someone refuses to agree to the directive to accept a certain man as their god.

- Be shrewd as a snake but pretend you're an innocent dove amongst all the other already accused 'wolves'. Right. Subterfuge against pre-determined enemy. Be another wolf in sheep's clothing. Not nice.

Sorry, but all of that just sounds domineering, egotistical and hypocritical subterfuge, and quite shocking actually considering the whole tone of his sermon on the mount. 

Honestly, I just don't think I can believe that directive actually came out of Jesus mouth the way it's been written. I think it's a lie. 

It IS an insulting curse all told and frankly I don't think he ever said it. But there are millions of people who do believe and accept it because it's written in the book and they have to believe the book and do what the book directs them to do.

Which kind of brings us back full circle to the original post in this topic - the question of whether or not that book has become another idol to be worshipped and some of the stuff written in there is false and doesn't represent the real thing.

.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

hey NL--just wanted to _attempt_ to respond  yes, that is how it appears for sure. and it's nothing new for a directive of the bible to be abused in execution.

I dont' have a complete answer for myself at this point, beyond from all my personal interaction with bible reading(for myself) and living life--that I "know" that as a Christian I'm not supposed to flog others but to rather BE and have an answer if they ask. As far as rejecting something, I do believe it is right for me to reject bad Christian teaching, as my "little s spirit" will help me discern.

I have no problem with saying "I dont' know". Again, I do think the shaking off dust thing relates to Jesus position as messiah for the world come through the Jewish "is"(which is what the whole bible is all about). Jesus DID say he IS the (Jewish)Messiah--no doubt about that(from the bible) and for him to ask for recognition/choice from "his" people(Jews) is natural. Again, I dont' see the shaking off of dust applying to any other creed. Yes, "demanding" is a side of Jesus that is not discussed and it seems to not fit. But God is God is God, it's something that by faith I see it, and throw it into the mix and trust I will understand someday.

Indeed men misinterpret to wield power and get their jollies. THat comes from pride, which I believe pride is the "worst" sin, and all others are basically "equal"(for instance, the bible talks a heck of a lot more about pride than homosexuality, ha ).

No I dont' believe the book is false, this comes from me living my life and mulling it over in the background, testing it and seeing it "works". Sure there are things I dont' understand, but I understand enough to know the book is a good thing. Yes I think people idolize it--as in they focus on bible study and not on personal relationship with Jesus*(hm, I remember a thread a while ago...) and use it to flog people for nefarious reasons. The MAIN THING for a Christian is to simply BE JESUS to the world--not flog people for not following a rulebook they never agreed to follow. 

(to you nl, I would heretically say that bible reading is a jump off point for relationship with God  kwim? (good lord there are Christians who only have a half of a torn page from the Bible and still manage to "be" Christian...kwim? and I'll also finish myself off by speculating those people are perhaps closer to touching the face of God, because they have nothing but...kwim?)


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

naturelover said:


> - Find a worthy person? By whose criteria is a person judged worthy? *I suspect a study of the word "worthy" in the original language would say something more like "Person of good character and leader of the community, an influential person who people see as wise and of good judgment" to go to such a person is natural for a "diplomatic" mission between the Messiah and his people(again, I believe this was between the disciples and the Jews back in a specific place in time--but of course that's just my opinion*
> 
> - If the home is deserving, bless it with peace. If it isn't deemed deserving take your peace blessing back. Why take back a peace blessing once given? By whose criteria is the home judged deserving of a peace blessing? Shouldn't ALL homes and towns be deserving of a peace blessing? *Off the top of my head guests are to be honored and cared for--this is a tradition/manners thing(?)*
> 
> ...


hope that helps maybe a teeny bit?


----------

