Cathelic vs Christain
Does anyone know the different and the similarity of these 2 religion?
Full Version: Cathelic Vs Christain
- if you're Catholic you've gotta do lent (give up red meat or something) in the spring
- if you're catholic you've gotta go to confession
-if you're catholic you can't get abortions or use birth control
- Catholicism has a crucifix instead of a plain cross
- in catholicism there is a pope
hmm.. i can't think of anything else, i'll post more if i can think of them
- if you're catholic you've gotta go to confession
-if you're catholic you can't get abortions or use birth control
- Catholicism has a crucifix instead of a plain cross
- in catholicism there is a pope
hmm.. i can't think of anything else, i'll post more if i can think of them
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_capr.htm
http://www.kensmen.com/catholic/differences.html
Read up
I think one of the main differences is that Christians alone believe faith will save you, while Catholics believed in faith and deeds.
http://www.kensmen.com/catholic/differences.html
Read up
I think one of the main differences is that Christians alone believe faith will save you, while Catholics believed in faith and deeds.
All catholics are Christians but not all Christians are catholic
There are many differences in the beliefs between the Catholicism and Christianity which many have pointed out already. The biggest difference I see between the two is that Jesus set up the Catholic Church on earth (through St. Peter) and then through time, people like Luther and Calvin decided by themselves that they didn't believe some of the things that Jesus taught and hence created protestantism and other denominations. So the Catholic Church was set up by Jesus. Protestantism is set up by man.
i am not sure,. they seem pretty similar to me actually.
christian is less conservative, maybe?
christian is less conservative, maybe?
The main difference, between the two, is that Catholics do not completely follow exactly what the Bible says, but they do have faith, indeed.
Yet, Christians claims, and i believe, follow everything that Bible tells them.
Yet, Christians claims, and i believe, follow everything that Bible tells them.
QUOTE (Colordevil @ Jun 6 2004, 06:22 PM)
The main difference, between the two, is that Catholics do not completely follow exactly what the Bible says, but they do have faith, indeed.
Yet, Christians claims, and i believe, follow everything that Bible tells them.
Yet, Christians claims, and i believe, follow everything that Bible tells them.
you've got to be kidding me...protestants pick and choose from the Bible what to believe...why do you think there are so many different denominations (calvinists, lutherans, protestants, evangelists, etc.)...it's because they all interpret the Bible differently...which comes to my next point in that the teachings of Catholicism has never changed even in the pressures of todays culture. We believe what we teach and we stand by it. Some protestant denominations sway in their beliefs according to the changing times. Now, if one follows the Bible completely, why would they have to change their beliefs/doctrines? The fact still remains, that Jesus set up the Catholic church, while man established all other denominations. If one believed in God, i think the answer is obvious that they would want to follow the Church of God...not the church of man.
The reason why many people say Catholics don't follow the Bible exactly is cause we don't take each quote literally from the Bible. Many protestants will counter arguments with specific quotes from the Bible but what they fail to see is that you can't take quotes out of context. It has to be interpreted as a whole along with the overall message of God's love. In that sense, the views of many Protestants are skewed. Just because you believe in God isn't going to save you. No one (except God) knows who will be saved.
Ok.
QUOTE (Byron @ Jun 6 2004, 07:15 PM)
QUOTE (invasian @ Jun 6 2004, 02:13 PM)
There are many differences in the beliefs between the Catholicism and Christianity which many have pointed out already. The biggest difference I see between the two is that Jesus set up the Catholic Church on earth (through St. Peter) and then through time, people like Luther and Calvin decided by themselves that they didn't believe some of the things that Jesus taught and hence created protestantism and other denominations. So the Catholic Church was set up by Jesus. Protestantism is set up by man.
What??? No the first Christians were NON-Catholics who were the followers of the Jesus and after Jesus died and was resurrected to heaven those Christians taught others and then came Paul and taught others about Christ and those people are the first Christians.
Catholicism came right after and killed many protestants in the Inquisition.
Christianity was made by Jesus, Catholicism was made by man.
Catholics believe in the wrong things, like:
-praying to saints(which is forbiddon since praying to anyone other than God is considered Idolatry)
-Mary is the "Mother of God" and is called the Holy Queen and many Catholics actually worship her more than they do Jesus.
Even though Mary was mentioned only briefly in the new Testament like at the beginning and a few times afterwards.
-Catholics believe that the Pope gets "revelations" from God and is the only one on Earth that does and thus everyone has to listen to the Pope.
The bible teaches that the Holy Spirit reveals the truth about God and thus anyone who has it can hear God, not just the Pope.
So basically the difference is, Christians believe in the bible and the word of God while Catholics believe in whatever the Pope tells them and I hear Catholics are encouraged NOT to read the Bible as well and should only listen to the Pope to do.
We don't pray to saints...we ask for their intercession since they are in heaven with God
We don't worship Mary...we revere her...after all, she is the Mother of God
It's funny because i get this all the time...people will adamantly tell me that we worship saints and Mary...and that just isn't so...it's amazing how people not of Catholic faith know so well what we do...please make sure you have correct information about our beliefs.
QUOTE
-Catholics believe that the Pope gets "revelations" from God and is the only one on Earth that does and thus everyone has to listen to the Pope.
The bible teaches that the Holy Spirit reveals the truth about God and thus anyone who has it can hear God, not just the Pope.
The bible teaches that the Holy Spirit reveals the truth about God and thus anyone who has it can hear God, not just the Pope.
Wrong...I just don't know where you got that from...you even said yourself that we believe in saints...what you've heard is most likely anti-Catholic propaganda
QUOTE
So basically the difference is, Christians believe in the bible and the word of God while Catholics believe in whatever the Pope tells them and I hear Catholics are encouraged NOT to read the Bible as well and should only listen to the Pope to do.
Again...Jesus set up the Church and set Peter as the first Pope of his church...that is specifically in the Bible..."And I say also to thee, That thou art Peter (Petros), and upon this rock (petra) I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Matthew 16.18" ...so i don't know what you are talking about when you say that is not true...also Catholics are christians (catholic means universal)...as are protestants and other denominations. So to answer the original question, catholicism and christianity are one and the same...it's just that now there are the protestants and other denominations and those tend to be considered christianity, while Catholics stand apart.
In fact, we are encouraged to read the Bible. I would like to know where you heard these things.
Hmmmmmmm.
Simple.
Christian belief and practice has become varied through the years.
Christianity, being one of the most widespread *religions* has many branches:
Roman Catholicism, Eastern Rite Catholicism, Coptic Christianity, Greek Orthodox, Calvinism, Lutheranism, etc.
(same with butterfly's answer.)
...
I dunno where some people got the idea that only Protestants and other Independent Christians should be the ones to be exclusively called Christians. maybe it's the "Holier Than Thou" attitude. They ARE Christians though, but they are NOT the only ones: there are Orthodox churches, Catholic ones etc. etc.
And YOU two up there. This "Holier-than-Thou" attitude is immature, childish and obnoxious. Stop this! This will get nowhere. This is just giving ALL Christians, Catholic or Protestant, a bad name.
p.s. Cuong: it's CATHOLIC, not CATHELIC.
Christian belief and practice has become varied through the years.
Christianity, being one of the most widespread *religions* has many branches:
Roman Catholicism, Eastern Rite Catholicism, Coptic Christianity, Greek Orthodox, Calvinism, Lutheranism, etc.
(same with butterfly's answer.)
...
I dunno where some people got the idea that only Protestants and other Independent Christians should be the ones to be exclusively called Christians. maybe it's the "Holier Than Thou" attitude. They ARE Christians though, but they are NOT the only ones: there are Orthodox churches, Catholic ones etc. etc.
And YOU two up there. This "Holier-than-Thou" attitude is immature, childish and obnoxious. Stop this! This will get nowhere. This is just giving ALL Christians, Catholic or Protestant, a bad name.
p.s. Cuong: it's CATHOLIC, not CATHELIC.
QUOTE (invasian @ Jun 7 2004, 03:13 AM)
There are many differences in the beliefs between the Catholicism and Christianity which many have pointed out already. The biggest difference I see between the two is that Jesus set up the Catholic Church on earth (through St. Peter) and then through time, people like Luther and Calvin decided by themselves that they didn't believe some of the things that Jesus taught and hence created protestantism and other denominations. So the Catholic Church was set up by Jesus. Protestantism is set up by man.
I think some of the difference is Catholic had images and saints which a lot of Christian sects frown on!
QUOTE (whitewatcher @ Jun 6 2004, 09:26 PM)
Simple.
Christian belief and practice has become varied through the years.
Christianity, being one of the most widespread *religions* has many branches:
Roman Catholicism, Eastern Rite Catholicism, Coptic Christianity, Greek Orthodox, Calvinism, Lutheranism, etc.
(same with butterfly's answer.)
...
I dunno where some people got the idea that only Protestants and other Independent Christians should be the ones to be exclusively called Christians. maybe it's the "Holier Than Thou" attitude. They ARE Christians though, but they are NOT the only ones: there are Orthodox churches, Catholic ones etc. etc.
And YOU two up there. This "Holier-than-Thou" attitude is immature, childish and obnoxious. Stop this! This will get nowhere. This is just giving ALL Christians, Catholic or Protestant, a bad name.
p.s. Cuong: it's CATHOLIC, not CATHELIC.
Christian belief and practice has become varied through the years.
Christianity, being one of the most widespread *religions* has many branches:
Roman Catholicism, Eastern Rite Catholicism, Coptic Christianity, Greek Orthodox, Calvinism, Lutheranism, etc.
(same with butterfly's answer.)
...
I dunno where some people got the idea that only Protestants and other Independent Christians should be the ones to be exclusively called Christians. maybe it's the "Holier Than Thou" attitude. They ARE Christians though, but they are NOT the only ones: there are Orthodox churches, Catholic ones etc. etc.
And YOU two up there. This "Holier-than-Thou" attitude is immature, childish and obnoxious. Stop this! This will get nowhere. This is just giving ALL Christians, Catholic or Protestant, a bad name.
p.s. Cuong: it's CATHOLIC, not CATHELIC.
Whitewater,
I am merely trying to point out the inconsistencies and wrong assumptions of Byron's posts as he is declaring what he believes Catholics believe. I have made no attacks on what Protestants believe and am only trying to clear up the matter on what Byron mistakenly believes about Catholics. But it does not even appear that Byron is willing to listen since he keeps throwing out these ridiculous statements about Catholicism. As a Catholic, I feel that I should defend the false assumptions and statements made about our faith.
If you've been on this board long enough, you know that lately, all i have been posting is pictures. But I had to respond to these statements cause i feel strongly about them. Like I said, I was only trying to point out the false statements made by Byron.
Byron,
I feel that you have very negative and antagonistic feelings towards Catholics. Perhaps if you were to truly find out what Catholics believe, you would see our faith in a different light. There are many statements that you have made that are just not true. If you were to read our Catechism, you would certainly find the truth of this. I will indeed pray that you find some resolution in your attitude towards Catholics, since it is not Christian-like to behave in such a manner.
To all others,
If you are searching for God, I strongly suggest that you read about all faiths before following one. Be careful of good and bad propaganda as well as opinions. Look into the beliefs and doctrines carefully before believing in something. Faith is not something that should be taken lightly, and certainly a limited discussion about it on this message board doesn't do it justice. I believe everyone owes it to themselves to make a truthful effort at finding God.
Very well said!
What is your religion invasian?
What is your religion invasian?
Okay, invasian. I understand, I am Catholic as well. Thank you. 
Ok.
So? Do Catholics see Protestants as doing wrong faith and Protestants see Catholics as doing wrong faith?
It is kinda hard. From my view Byron does have logic (though he maybe and agressive writer, but it does carry logic) and so does invasian carry logic also.
I'm not familiar with Christianity so bear with me, but when Byron said that to talk with anyone else other than God, that means God doesn't have the power to communicate so there is a middle-man. How do the Catholics see this?
Also invasion said that Catholics follow the Bible more closely. If the Bible is truth, then to follow it any other way would be weird?
I'm not sure - it's just that I don't understand why Protestant and Catholics are so far from each other?
It is kinda hard. From my view Byron does have logic (though he maybe and agressive writer, but it does carry logic) and so does invasian carry logic also.
I'm not familiar with Christianity so bear with me, but when Byron said that to talk with anyone else other than God, that means God doesn't have the power to communicate so there is a middle-man. How do the Catholics see this?
Also invasion said that Catholics follow the Bible more closely. If the Bible is truth, then to follow it any other way would be weird?
I'm not sure - it's just that I don't understand why Protestant and Catholics are so far from each other?
Hmmmmm.
QUOTE (Byron @ Jun 7 2004, 06:48 AM)
That's the whole point, for God to have a relationship with YOU.
So why would you need Jesus in the first place - isn't God powerful enough to do without Jesus like he does without Saints?
QUOTE (invasian @ Jun 6 2004, 06:49 PM)
protestants pick and choose from the Bible what to believe...
Just so u know, the Catholic Church is notorious for "making up" new rules to find salvation..
For example teaching people they could "Buy" their ticket to heaven or forgiveness by giving up money. That’s just one example. The protestant churches wanted to stay within the rules of the bible not go and make up their own.
Some churches outside of the catholic one do about the same things the catholic one does or pick and chose what to believe in the bible.. But this is not the case with the majority so it is not a good idea to generalize too much
Right.
Byron,
I only reply because once again, you misunderstood what i posted. First, I'm not praying that you find Catholicism. Reread my post and you will see that I said I am praying that you find resolution towards your attitude towards Catholicism...meaning you won't have hostility towards it (or any other religion for that matter).
Second, the Catholic church is the only church that can trace its roots back to St. Peter, who was the first Pope. As I mentioned before, Jesus established the Church through St. Peter..."And I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (vs. 18)"
St. Peter (33(?)-67(?))
St. Linus (67(?)-79(?))
Pope Anacletus I (79(?)-88)
Pope Clement I (88-97)
Pope Evaristus (97-105)
Pope Alexander I (105-115)
Pope Sixtus I (115-125)
Pope Telesphorus (125-136)
Pope Hyginus (136-140)
Pope Pius I (140-155)
Pope Anicetus (155-166)
Pope Soter (166-175)
Pope Eleuterus (175-189)
Pope Victor I (189-199)
Pope Zephyrinus (199-217)
Pope Callixtus I (217-222)
Pope Urban I (222-230)
Pope Pontian (230-235)
Pope Anterus (235-236)
Pope Fabian (236-250)
Pope Cornelius (251-253)
Pope Lucius I (253-254)
Pope Stephen I (254-257)
Pope Sixtus II (257-258)
Pope Dionysius (260-268)
Pope Felix I (269-274)
Pope Eutychian (275-283)
Pope Caius (283-296)
Pope Marcellinus (296-304)
Pope Marcellus I (308-309)
Pope Eusebius (309-310)
Pope Miltiades (311-314)
Pope Silvester I (314-335)
Pope Marcus (335-336)
Pope Julius I (337-352)
Pope Liberius (352-366)
Pope Damasus I (366-383)
Pope Siricius (384-399)
Pope Anastasius I (399-401)
Pope Innocent I (401-417)
Pope Zosimus (417-418)
Pope Boniface I (418-422)
Pope Celestine I (422-432)
Pope Sixtus III (432-440)
Pope Leo I (440-461)
Pope Hilarius (461-468)
Pope Simplicius (468-483)
Pope Felix III (483-492)
Pope Gelasius I (492-496)
Pope Anastasius II (496-498)
Pope Symmachus (498-514)
Pope Hormisdas (514-523)
Pope John I (523-526)
Pope Felix IV (526-530)
Pope Boniface II (530-532)
Pope John II (533-535)
Pope Agapetus I (535-536)
Pope Silverius (536-537)
Pope Vigilius (537-555)
Pope Pelagius I (556-561)
Pope John III (561-574)
Pope Benedict I (575-579)
Pope Pelagius II (579-590)
Pope Gregory I the Great (590-604)
Pope Sabinianus (604-606)
Pope Boniface III (607)
Pope Boniface IV (608-615)
Pope Deusdedit (615-618)
Pope Boniface V (619-625)
Pope Honorius I (625-638)
Pope Severinus (640)
Pope John IV (640-642)
Pope Theodore I (642-649)
Pope Martin I (649-655)
Pope Eugene I (654-657)
Pope Vitalian (657-672)
Pope Adeodatus (672-676)
Pope Donus (676-678)
Pope Agatho (678-681)
Pope Leo II (682-683)
Pope Benedict II (684-685)
Pope John V (685-686)
Pope Conon (686-687)
Pope Sergius I (687-701)
Pope John VI (701-705)
Pope John VII (705-709)
Pope Sisinnius (708)
Pope Constantine (708-715)
Pope Gregory II (715-731)
Pope Gregory III (731-741)
Pope Zacharias (741-752)
Pope Stephen II (752)
Pope Stephen III (752-757)
Pope Paul I (757-767)
Pope Stephen IV (767-772)
Pope Adrian I (772-795)
Pope Leo III (795-816)
Pope Stephen V (816-817)
Pope Paschal I (817-824)
Pope Eugene II (824-827)
Pope Valentinus (827)
Pope Gregory IV (827-844)
Pope Sergius II (844-847)
Pope Leo IV (847-853)
Pope Benedict III (855-858)
Pope Nicholas I the Great (858-867)
Pope Adrian II (867-872)
Pope John VIII (872-882)
Pope Marinus I (882-884)
Pope Adrian III (884-885)
Pope Stephen VI (885-891)
Pope Formosus (891-896)
Pope Boniface VI (896)
Pope Stephen VII (896-897)
Pope Romanus (897)
Pope Theodore II (897)
Pope John IX (898-900)
Pope Benedict IV (900-903)
Pope Leo V (903)
Pope Christopher (903-904)
Pope Sergius III (904-911)
Pope Anastasius III (911-913)
Pope Lando (913-914)
Pope John X (914-928)
Pope Leo VI (928-929)
Pope Stephen VIII (929-931)
Pope John XI (931-935)
Pope Leo VII (936-939)
Pope Stephen IX (939-942)
Pope Marinus II (942-946)
Pope Agapetus II (946-955)
Pope John XII (955-963)
Pope Leo VIII (963-964)
Pope Benedict V (964)
Pope John XIII (965-972)
Pope Benedict VI (973-974)
Pope Benedict VII (974-983)
Pope John XIV (983-984)
Pope John XV (985-996)
Pope Gregory V (996-999): Bruno of Carinthia
Pope Silvester II (999-1003): Gerbert of Aurillac
Pope John XVII (1003): Sicco
Pope John XVIII (1003-1009): Giovanni Fasano
Pope Sergius IV (1009-1012): Peter Pig's Snout (Bucca Porci)
Pope Benedict VIII (1012-1024): Theophylactus II, Count of Tusculum
Pope John XIX (1024-1032): Romanus, Count of Tusculum
Pope Benedict IX (1032-1045): Theophylactus III, Count of Tusculum
Pope Benedict IX (1045): Theophylactus III, Count of Tusculum
Pope Gregory VI (1045-1046): Johannes Gratianus
Pope Clement II (1046-1047): Sudiger
Pope Benedict IX (1047-1048): Theophylactus III, Count of Tusculum
Pope Damasus II (1048): Poppo
Pope Leo IX (1049-1054): Bruno
Pope Victor II (1055-1057): Gebhard, Count of Calw, Tollenstein, and Hirschberg
Pope Stephen X (1057-1058): Frederick of Lorraine
Pope Nicholas II (1058-1061): Gerard of Burgundy (Gérard de Bourgogne)
Pope Alexander II (1061-1073): Anselmo Baggio
Pope Gregory VII (1073-1085): Hildebrand
Pope Victor III (1086-1087): Desiderio
Pope Urban II (1088-1099): Odo of Lagery
Pope Paschal II (1099-1118): Rainerius
Pope Gelasius II (1118-1119): Giovanni Coniulo
Pope Callixtus II (1119-1124): Guido, Count of Burgundy
Pope Honorius II (1124-1130): Lambert of Ostia
Pope Innocent II (1130-1143): Gregorio Papereschi
Pope Celestine II (1143-1144): Guido di Castello
Pope Lucius II (1144-1145): Gherardo Caccianemici dal Orso
Pope Eugene III (1145-1153): Bernardo Pignatelli
Pope Anastasius IV (1153-1154): Corrado di Subarra
Pope Adrian IV (1154-1159): Nicholas Breakspear
Pope Alexander III (1159-1181): Orlando Bandinelli
Pope Lucius III (1181-1185): Ubaldo Allucingoli
Pope Urban III (1185-1187): Uberto Crivelli
Pope Gregory VIII (1187): Albert de Mora
Pope Clement III (1187-1191): Paulino Scolari
Pope Celestine III (1191-1198): Giacinto Bobone Orsini
Pope Innocent III (1198-1216): Lotario de Conti
Pope Honorius III (1216-1227): Cencio Savelli
Pope Gregory IX (1227-1241): Ugolino, Count of Segni
Pope Celestine IV (1241): Godfrey Castiglioni
Pope Innocent IV (1243-1254): Sinibaldo de Fieschi
Pope Alexander IV (1254-1261): Rinaldo Conti
Pope Urban IV (1261-1264): Jacques Pantaléon
Pope Clement IV (1265-1268): Guy Foulques
Pope Gregory X (1271-1276): Theobald Visconti
Pope Innocent V (1276): Pierre de Tarentaise
Pope Adrian V (1276): Ottobuono de' Fieschi
Pope John XXI (1276-1277): Petrus Juliani (Petrus Hispanus)
Pope Nicholas III (1277-1280): Giovanni Gaetano Orsini
Pope Martin IV (1281-1285): Simon de Brie
Pope Honorius IV (1285-1287): Giacomo Savelli
Pope Nicholas IV (1288-1292): Girolamo Masci
Pope Celestine V (1294): Pietro di Morone
Pope Boniface VIII (1294-1303): Benedetto Gaetano
Pope Benedict XI (1303-1304): Nicholas Boccasini
Pope Clement V (1305-1314): Bertrand de Got
Pope John XXII (1316-1334): Jacques d'Euse
Pope Benedict XII (1334-1342): Jacques Fournier
Pope Clement VI (1342-1352): Pierre Roger
Pope Innocent VI (1352-1362): Stephen Aubert
Pope Urban V (1362-1370): Guillaume de Grimoard
Pope Gregory XI (1370-1378): Pierre Roger de Beaufort
Pope Urban VI (1378-1389): Bartolomeo Prignano
Pope Boniface IX (1389-1404): Piero Tomacelli
Pope Innocent VII (1404-1406): Cosimo de' Migliorati
Pope Gregory XII (1406-1415): Angelo Coraria (Corraro or Correr)
Pope Martin V (1417-1431): Otto di Colonna
Pope Eugenius IV (1431-1447): Gabriel Condulmer
Pope Nicholas V (1447-1455): Tomaso Parentucelli (Tomaso da Sarzana)
Pope Callixtus III (1455-1458): Alphonso de Borgia
Pope Pius II (1458-1464): Enea Silvio Piccolomini (Aeneas Sylvius)
Pope Paul II (1464-1471): Pietro Barbo
Pope Sixtus IV (1471-1484): Francesco della Rovere
Pope Innocent VIII (1484-1492): Giovanni Battista Cibo
Pope Alexander VI (1492-1503): Rodrigo Borgia
Pope Pius III (1503): Francesco Todeschini Piccolomini
Pope Julius II (1503-1513): Giuliano della Rovere
Pope Leo X (1513-1521): Giovanni di Lorenzo de' Medici
Pope Adrian VI (1522-1523): Adrian Dedel
Pope Clement VII (1523-1534): Giulio di Giuliano de' Medici
Pope Paul III (1534-1549): Alessandro Farnese
Pope Julius III (1550-1555): Gian Maria del Monte, or Giovan Maria Giocci
Pope Marcellus II (1555): Marcellus Corvini
Pope Paul IV (1555-1559): Gianni Carafa
Pope Pius IV (1559-1565): Giovanni Angelo Medici
Pope Pius V (1566-1572): Antonio Ghislieri
Pope Gregory XIII (1572-1585): Ugo Buoncampagno
Pope Sixtus V (1585-1590): Felice Peretti
Pope Urban VII (1590): Giovanni Battista Castagna
Pope Gregory XIV (1590-1591): Niccolo Sfondrato (Sfondrati)
Pope Innocent IX (1591): Gian Antonio Facchinetti
Pope Clement VIII (1592-1605): Ippolito Aldobrandini
Pope Leo XI (1605): Alessandro de' Medici
Pope Paul V (1605-1621): Camillo Borghese
Pope Gregory XV (1621-1623): Alessandro Ludovisio
Pope Urban VIII (1623-1644): Maffeo Barberini
Pope Innocent X (1644-1655): Giovanni Battista Pamphili
Pope Alexander VII (1655-1667): Fabio Chigi
Pope Clement IX (1667-1669): Giulio Rospigliosi
Pope Clement X (1670-1676): Emilio Altieri
Pope Innocent XI (1676-1689): Benedetto Odescalchi
Pope Alexander VIII (1689-1691): Pietro Vitto Ottoboni
Pope Innocent XII (1691-1700): Antonio Pignatelli
Pope Clement XI (1700-1721): Giovanni Francesco Albani
Pope Innocent XIII (1721-1724): Michael Angelo Conti
Pope Benedict XIII (1724-1730): Vincenzo Marco Orsini
Pope Clement XII (1730-1740): Lorenzo Corsini
Pope Benedict XIV (1740-1758): Prospero Lorenzo Lambertini
Pope Clement XIII (1758-1769): Carlo Rezzonico
Pope Clement XIV (1769-1774): Giovanni Vincenzo Antonio Ganganelli
Pope Pius VI (1775-1799): Giovanni Angelo Braschi
Pope Pius VII (1800-1823): Barnaba Chiaramonti
Pope Leo XII (1823-1829): Annibale della Genga
Pope Pius VIII (1829-1830): Francesco Saverio Castigliani
Pope Gregory XVI (1831-1846): Bartolomeo Alberto Cappellari
Pope Pius IX (1846-1878): Giovanni Maria Mastai-Ferretti
Pope Leo XIII (1878-1903): Gioacchino Pecci
Pope Pius X (1903-1914): Giuseppe Melchiorre Sarto
Pope Benedict XV (1914-1922): Giacomo della Chiesa
Pope Pius XI (1922-1939): Achille Ratti
Pope Pius XII (1939-1958): Maria Giuseppe Giovanni Eugenio Pacelli
Pope John XXIII (1958-1963): Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli
Pope Paul VI (1963-1978): Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini
Pope John Paul I (1978): Albino Luciani
Pope John Paul II (1978-present): Karol Józef Wojtyła
When i say that Protestantism is a religion established by man, I mean that the Church began with the one that was established by Jesus and then through time, some men disagreed with the stances of the Church and protested...for example, Martin Luther...he started the protestant reformation...and then because another guy didn't agree with Luther, another protestant group came about, ie. the calvinists...and each time someone disagreed with some belief, another denomination came about...and so now, there are many protestants (i.e. protestants, calvinists, lutherans, etc.) each with similar but distinctly different aspects of beliefs.
Ek-ek,
I am Catholic.
I only reply because once again, you misunderstood what i posted. First, I'm not praying that you find Catholicism. Reread my post and you will see that I said I am praying that you find resolution towards your attitude towards Catholicism...meaning you won't have hostility towards it (or any other religion for that matter).
Second, the Catholic church is the only church that can trace its roots back to St. Peter, who was the first Pope. As I mentioned before, Jesus established the Church through St. Peter..."And I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (vs. 18)"
St. Peter (33(?)-67(?))
St. Linus (67(?)-79(?))
Pope Anacletus I (79(?)-88)
Pope Clement I (88-97)
Pope Evaristus (97-105)
Pope Alexander I (105-115)
Pope Sixtus I (115-125)
Pope Telesphorus (125-136)
Pope Hyginus (136-140)
Pope Pius I (140-155)
Pope Anicetus (155-166)
Pope Soter (166-175)
Pope Eleuterus (175-189)
Pope Victor I (189-199)
Pope Zephyrinus (199-217)
Pope Callixtus I (217-222)
Pope Urban I (222-230)
Pope Pontian (230-235)
Pope Anterus (235-236)
Pope Fabian (236-250)
Pope Cornelius (251-253)
Pope Lucius I (253-254)
Pope Stephen I (254-257)
Pope Sixtus II (257-258)
Pope Dionysius (260-268)
Pope Felix I (269-274)
Pope Eutychian (275-283)
Pope Caius (283-296)
Pope Marcellinus (296-304)
Pope Marcellus I (308-309)
Pope Eusebius (309-310)
Pope Miltiades (311-314)
Pope Silvester I (314-335)
Pope Marcus (335-336)
Pope Julius I (337-352)
Pope Liberius (352-366)
Pope Damasus I (366-383)
Pope Siricius (384-399)
Pope Anastasius I (399-401)
Pope Innocent I (401-417)
Pope Zosimus (417-418)
Pope Boniface I (418-422)
Pope Celestine I (422-432)
Pope Sixtus III (432-440)
Pope Leo I (440-461)
Pope Hilarius (461-468)
Pope Simplicius (468-483)
Pope Felix III (483-492)
Pope Gelasius I (492-496)
Pope Anastasius II (496-498)
Pope Symmachus (498-514)
Pope Hormisdas (514-523)
Pope John I (523-526)
Pope Felix IV (526-530)
Pope Boniface II (530-532)
Pope John II (533-535)
Pope Agapetus I (535-536)
Pope Silverius (536-537)
Pope Vigilius (537-555)
Pope Pelagius I (556-561)
Pope John III (561-574)
Pope Benedict I (575-579)
Pope Pelagius II (579-590)
Pope Gregory I the Great (590-604)
Pope Sabinianus (604-606)
Pope Boniface III (607)
Pope Boniface IV (608-615)
Pope Deusdedit (615-618)
Pope Boniface V (619-625)
Pope Honorius I (625-638)
Pope Severinus (640)
Pope John IV (640-642)
Pope Theodore I (642-649)
Pope Martin I (649-655)
Pope Eugene I (654-657)
Pope Vitalian (657-672)
Pope Adeodatus (672-676)
Pope Donus (676-678)
Pope Agatho (678-681)
Pope Leo II (682-683)
Pope Benedict II (684-685)
Pope John V (685-686)
Pope Conon (686-687)
Pope Sergius I (687-701)
Pope John VI (701-705)
Pope John VII (705-709)
Pope Sisinnius (708)
Pope Constantine (708-715)
Pope Gregory II (715-731)
Pope Gregory III (731-741)
Pope Zacharias (741-752)
Pope Stephen II (752)
Pope Stephen III (752-757)
Pope Paul I (757-767)
Pope Stephen IV (767-772)
Pope Adrian I (772-795)
Pope Leo III (795-816)
Pope Stephen V (816-817)
Pope Paschal I (817-824)
Pope Eugene II (824-827)
Pope Valentinus (827)
Pope Gregory IV (827-844)
Pope Sergius II (844-847)
Pope Leo IV (847-853)
Pope Benedict III (855-858)
Pope Nicholas I the Great (858-867)
Pope Adrian II (867-872)
Pope John VIII (872-882)
Pope Marinus I (882-884)
Pope Adrian III (884-885)
Pope Stephen VI (885-891)
Pope Formosus (891-896)
Pope Boniface VI (896)
Pope Stephen VII (896-897)
Pope Romanus (897)
Pope Theodore II (897)
Pope John IX (898-900)
Pope Benedict IV (900-903)
Pope Leo V (903)
Pope Christopher (903-904)
Pope Sergius III (904-911)
Pope Anastasius III (911-913)
Pope Lando (913-914)
Pope John X (914-928)
Pope Leo VI (928-929)
Pope Stephen VIII (929-931)
Pope John XI (931-935)
Pope Leo VII (936-939)
Pope Stephen IX (939-942)
Pope Marinus II (942-946)
Pope Agapetus II (946-955)
Pope John XII (955-963)
Pope Leo VIII (963-964)
Pope Benedict V (964)
Pope John XIII (965-972)
Pope Benedict VI (973-974)
Pope Benedict VII (974-983)
Pope John XIV (983-984)
Pope John XV (985-996)
Pope Gregory V (996-999): Bruno of Carinthia
Pope Silvester II (999-1003): Gerbert of Aurillac
Pope John XVII (1003): Sicco
Pope John XVIII (1003-1009): Giovanni Fasano
Pope Sergius IV (1009-1012): Peter Pig's Snout (Bucca Porci)
Pope Benedict VIII (1012-1024): Theophylactus II, Count of Tusculum
Pope John XIX (1024-1032): Romanus, Count of Tusculum
Pope Benedict IX (1032-1045): Theophylactus III, Count of Tusculum
Pope Benedict IX (1045): Theophylactus III, Count of Tusculum
Pope Gregory VI (1045-1046): Johannes Gratianus
Pope Clement II (1046-1047): Sudiger
Pope Benedict IX (1047-1048): Theophylactus III, Count of Tusculum
Pope Damasus II (1048): Poppo
Pope Leo IX (1049-1054): Bruno
Pope Victor II (1055-1057): Gebhard, Count of Calw, Tollenstein, and Hirschberg
Pope Stephen X (1057-1058): Frederick of Lorraine
Pope Nicholas II (1058-1061): Gerard of Burgundy (Gérard de Bourgogne)
Pope Alexander II (1061-1073): Anselmo Baggio
Pope Gregory VII (1073-1085): Hildebrand
Pope Victor III (1086-1087): Desiderio
Pope Urban II (1088-1099): Odo of Lagery
Pope Paschal II (1099-1118): Rainerius
Pope Gelasius II (1118-1119): Giovanni Coniulo
Pope Callixtus II (1119-1124): Guido, Count of Burgundy
Pope Honorius II (1124-1130): Lambert of Ostia
Pope Innocent II (1130-1143): Gregorio Papereschi
Pope Celestine II (1143-1144): Guido di Castello
Pope Lucius II (1144-1145): Gherardo Caccianemici dal Orso
Pope Eugene III (1145-1153): Bernardo Pignatelli
Pope Anastasius IV (1153-1154): Corrado di Subarra
Pope Adrian IV (1154-1159): Nicholas Breakspear
Pope Alexander III (1159-1181): Orlando Bandinelli
Pope Lucius III (1181-1185): Ubaldo Allucingoli
Pope Urban III (1185-1187): Uberto Crivelli
Pope Gregory VIII (1187): Albert de Mora
Pope Clement III (1187-1191): Paulino Scolari
Pope Celestine III (1191-1198): Giacinto Bobone Orsini
Pope Innocent III (1198-1216): Lotario de Conti
Pope Honorius III (1216-1227): Cencio Savelli
Pope Gregory IX (1227-1241): Ugolino, Count of Segni
Pope Celestine IV (1241): Godfrey Castiglioni
Pope Innocent IV (1243-1254): Sinibaldo de Fieschi
Pope Alexander IV (1254-1261): Rinaldo Conti
Pope Urban IV (1261-1264): Jacques Pantaléon
Pope Clement IV (1265-1268): Guy Foulques
Pope Gregory X (1271-1276): Theobald Visconti
Pope Innocent V (1276): Pierre de Tarentaise
Pope Adrian V (1276): Ottobuono de' Fieschi
Pope John XXI (1276-1277): Petrus Juliani (Petrus Hispanus)
Pope Nicholas III (1277-1280): Giovanni Gaetano Orsini
Pope Martin IV (1281-1285): Simon de Brie
Pope Honorius IV (1285-1287): Giacomo Savelli
Pope Nicholas IV (1288-1292): Girolamo Masci
Pope Celestine V (1294): Pietro di Morone
Pope Boniface VIII (1294-1303): Benedetto Gaetano
Pope Benedict XI (1303-1304): Nicholas Boccasini
Pope Clement V (1305-1314): Bertrand de Got
Pope John XXII (1316-1334): Jacques d'Euse
Pope Benedict XII (1334-1342): Jacques Fournier
Pope Clement VI (1342-1352): Pierre Roger
Pope Innocent VI (1352-1362): Stephen Aubert
Pope Urban V (1362-1370): Guillaume de Grimoard
Pope Gregory XI (1370-1378): Pierre Roger de Beaufort
Pope Urban VI (1378-1389): Bartolomeo Prignano
Pope Boniface IX (1389-1404): Piero Tomacelli
Pope Innocent VII (1404-1406): Cosimo de' Migliorati
Pope Gregory XII (1406-1415): Angelo Coraria (Corraro or Correr)
Pope Martin V (1417-1431): Otto di Colonna
Pope Eugenius IV (1431-1447): Gabriel Condulmer
Pope Nicholas V (1447-1455): Tomaso Parentucelli (Tomaso da Sarzana)
Pope Callixtus III (1455-1458): Alphonso de Borgia
Pope Pius II (1458-1464): Enea Silvio Piccolomini (Aeneas Sylvius)
Pope Paul II (1464-1471): Pietro Barbo
Pope Sixtus IV (1471-1484): Francesco della Rovere
Pope Innocent VIII (1484-1492): Giovanni Battista Cibo
Pope Alexander VI (1492-1503): Rodrigo Borgia
Pope Pius III (1503): Francesco Todeschini Piccolomini
Pope Julius II (1503-1513): Giuliano della Rovere
Pope Leo X (1513-1521): Giovanni di Lorenzo de' Medici
Pope Adrian VI (1522-1523): Adrian Dedel
Pope Clement VII (1523-1534): Giulio di Giuliano de' Medici
Pope Paul III (1534-1549): Alessandro Farnese
Pope Julius III (1550-1555): Gian Maria del Monte, or Giovan Maria Giocci
Pope Marcellus II (1555): Marcellus Corvini
Pope Paul IV (1555-1559): Gianni Carafa
Pope Pius IV (1559-1565): Giovanni Angelo Medici
Pope Pius V (1566-1572): Antonio Ghislieri
Pope Gregory XIII (1572-1585): Ugo Buoncampagno
Pope Sixtus V (1585-1590): Felice Peretti
Pope Urban VII (1590): Giovanni Battista Castagna
Pope Gregory XIV (1590-1591): Niccolo Sfondrato (Sfondrati)
Pope Innocent IX (1591): Gian Antonio Facchinetti
Pope Clement VIII (1592-1605): Ippolito Aldobrandini
Pope Leo XI (1605): Alessandro de' Medici
Pope Paul V (1605-1621): Camillo Borghese
Pope Gregory XV (1621-1623): Alessandro Ludovisio
Pope Urban VIII (1623-1644): Maffeo Barberini
Pope Innocent X (1644-1655): Giovanni Battista Pamphili
Pope Alexander VII (1655-1667): Fabio Chigi
Pope Clement IX (1667-1669): Giulio Rospigliosi
Pope Clement X (1670-1676): Emilio Altieri
Pope Innocent XI (1676-1689): Benedetto Odescalchi
Pope Alexander VIII (1689-1691): Pietro Vitto Ottoboni
Pope Innocent XII (1691-1700): Antonio Pignatelli
Pope Clement XI (1700-1721): Giovanni Francesco Albani
Pope Innocent XIII (1721-1724): Michael Angelo Conti
Pope Benedict XIII (1724-1730): Vincenzo Marco Orsini
Pope Clement XII (1730-1740): Lorenzo Corsini
Pope Benedict XIV (1740-1758): Prospero Lorenzo Lambertini
Pope Clement XIII (1758-1769): Carlo Rezzonico
Pope Clement XIV (1769-1774): Giovanni Vincenzo Antonio Ganganelli
Pope Pius VI (1775-1799): Giovanni Angelo Braschi
Pope Pius VII (1800-1823): Barnaba Chiaramonti
Pope Leo XII (1823-1829): Annibale della Genga
Pope Pius VIII (1829-1830): Francesco Saverio Castigliani
Pope Gregory XVI (1831-1846): Bartolomeo Alberto Cappellari
Pope Pius IX (1846-1878): Giovanni Maria Mastai-Ferretti
Pope Leo XIII (1878-1903): Gioacchino Pecci
Pope Pius X (1903-1914): Giuseppe Melchiorre Sarto
Pope Benedict XV (1914-1922): Giacomo della Chiesa
Pope Pius XI (1922-1939): Achille Ratti
Pope Pius XII (1939-1958): Maria Giuseppe Giovanni Eugenio Pacelli
Pope John XXIII (1958-1963): Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli
Pope Paul VI (1963-1978): Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini
Pope John Paul I (1978): Albino Luciani
Pope John Paul II (1978-present): Karol Józef Wojtyła
When i say that Protestantism is a religion established by man, I mean that the Church began with the one that was established by Jesus and then through time, some men disagreed with the stances of the Church and protested...for example, Martin Luther...he started the protestant reformation...and then because another guy didn't agree with Luther, another protestant group came about, ie. the calvinists...and each time someone disagreed with some belief, another denomination came about...and so now, there are many protestants (i.e. protestants, calvinists, lutherans, etc.) each with similar but distinctly different aspects of beliefs.
Ek-ek,
I am Catholic.
Hmmmm.
QUOTE (invasian @ Jun 7 2004, 10:49 AM)
the Catholic church is the only church that can trace its roots back to St. Peter, who was the first Pope. As I mentioned before, Jesus established the Church through St. Peter..."And I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (vs. 18)"
Just because a good leader created an institution doesn’t mean the ones who follow him will be of the same caliber. Also nowhere does it say the church has to be "catholic". A church is where people come together and worship the same God. If the people find that their church and leaders have turned corrupt, they have every right to start over with new leaders
Remember there were many Jewish-Christian tribes today who claimed their first leaders were the Jewish-Christian disciples.
Remember that during the time when Muhammud conquered the Middle East for Islam many Christian tribes were killed or forced to convert to Islam. I'm sure they could also connect to Peter as well, but their historical records were probably destroyed by the Muslims and even their historical records may have been destroyed as well.
Remember the New Testament was written until decades or centuries after Jesus died and ressurrected, so there isn't really much known about the disciples and what their first chruch or group of people became which church that it is today?
Maybe the church that the disciples started doesn't even exist anymore, but we don't know since the New Testament wasn't written until after Jesus died and resurrected.
Remember that during the time when Muhammud conquered the Middle East for Islam many Christian tribes were killed or forced to convert to Islam. I'm sure they could also connect to Peter as well, but their historical records were probably destroyed by the Muslims and even their historical records may have been destroyed as well.
Remember the New Testament was written until decades or centuries after Jesus died and ressurrected, so there isn't really much known about the disciples and what their first chruch or group of people became which church that it is today?
Maybe the church that the disciples started doesn't even exist anymore, but we don't know since the New Testament wasn't written until after Jesus died and resurrected.
Byron,
The thing is though, that you can't just make a list and put St. Peter because ultimately it will trace back to Martin Luther, since he is the one that started Protestantism. The question marks refers to the dates when they were Popes and not as to whether they were actual successors. By all means, look into this yourself.
To all others,
A lot of what has been said about Catholicism is very severely misconstrued and put in a very negative light. For example, butterfly said that we are "notorious" for making new rules to find salvation. That is simply not the case. What you might mistaken that for is that sometimes (and this happens rarely), the Pope will issue a doctrine that further clarifies a dogma since there is confusion. However, we have always stayed true to the original Church's teachings. I do apologize for my earlier statement where i said that Protestants pick and choose what they believe. That statement did not come out correctly. What I meant by that is that when somebody in the protestatn community decides that they don't agree with a certain belief, they go off and break off into their own denomination. This is why there are so many protestant denominations ranging from the classical protestants, to calvinists, to lutherans, to episcopalians, to baptists, etc.
There have been many questions asked on this forum about what Catholics believe of this and that. If anyone is truly serious or are sincerely curious about these matters, then you can PM me or catch me on AIM/MSN and I will try my best to explain or point you to the right direction for these answers.
I will reiterate again the importance of truly finding about a particular faith before making judgements at all. Indeed, I have nothing but respect for anyone that shows me the same. And I find it admirable that people can be passionate about their faith. However, there is a fine line between having passion and then hatred for another religion. That is the attitude that will brings about religious intolerance. Byron, I can understand your passion for your faith (as I do with mine), but saying you hate Catholicism isn't having a very healthy (nor Christian-like) attitude. And that is why I said that I would pray for you.
Byron, we both are passionate about our faiths. My best friend is a passionate atheist. I see no reason why the two of us (who both believe in God) cannot be either. I offer my hand in friendship. The offer I made to others is available to you as well if you want to understand why Catholics believe what we believe. (Before you misunderstand me, I'm not trying to convert you; i'm just trying to get you to see where I'm coming from) For me, it's just very frustrating to see all of these misinterpreted views of Catholicism.
This will probably be the last I have to say on this topic, regardless of what other inconsistencies are said about the Catholic faith. I just hope that everyone has an open mind and do some research before coming to a conclusion about anything. Thanks everyone, for in searching for answers to your questions, my faith has become stronger.
The thing is though, that you can't just make a list and put St. Peter because ultimately it will trace back to Martin Luther, since he is the one that started Protestantism. The question marks refers to the dates when they were Popes and not as to whether they were actual successors. By all means, look into this yourself.
To all others,
A lot of what has been said about Catholicism is very severely misconstrued and put in a very negative light. For example, butterfly said that we are "notorious" for making new rules to find salvation. That is simply not the case. What you might mistaken that for is that sometimes (and this happens rarely), the Pope will issue a doctrine that further clarifies a dogma since there is confusion. However, we have always stayed true to the original Church's teachings. I do apologize for my earlier statement where i said that Protestants pick and choose what they believe. That statement did not come out correctly. What I meant by that is that when somebody in the protestatn community decides that they don't agree with a certain belief, they go off and break off into their own denomination. This is why there are so many protestant denominations ranging from the classical protestants, to calvinists, to lutherans, to episcopalians, to baptists, etc.
There have been many questions asked on this forum about what Catholics believe of this and that. If anyone is truly serious or are sincerely curious about these matters, then you can PM me or catch me on AIM/MSN and I will try my best to explain or point you to the right direction for these answers.
I will reiterate again the importance of truly finding about a particular faith before making judgements at all. Indeed, I have nothing but respect for anyone that shows me the same. And I find it admirable that people can be passionate about their faith. However, there is a fine line between having passion and then hatred for another religion. That is the attitude that will brings about religious intolerance. Byron, I can understand your passion for your faith (as I do with mine), but saying you hate Catholicism isn't having a very healthy (nor Christian-like) attitude. And that is why I said that I would pray for you.
Byron, we both are passionate about our faiths. My best friend is a passionate atheist. I see no reason why the two of us (who both believe in God) cannot be either. I offer my hand in friendship. The offer I made to others is available to you as well if you want to understand why Catholics believe what we believe. (Before you misunderstand me, I'm not trying to convert you; i'm just trying to get you to see where I'm coming from) For me, it's just very frustrating to see all of these misinterpreted views of Catholicism.
This will probably be the last I have to say on this topic, regardless of what other inconsistencies are said about the Catholic faith. I just hope that everyone has an open mind and do some research before coming to a conclusion about anything. Thanks everyone, for in searching for answers to your questions, my faith has become stronger.
Byron what kind of christian are u?
QUOTE (khuanam @ Jun 7 2004, 02:27 PM)
Byron what kind of christian are u?
I don't even go to Church, I don't belong to any denomination, I just read the bible and ponder what God wants and the end times. Yes I do believe in God and love him and I believe in the salvation and sacrifice of Jesus Christ the Lord God Almighty.
However based on observing both Protestantism and Catholicism I do believe Protestantism have practices much more closer to the Bible than Catholicism does.
To Invasion, I never said I hated Catholics, I hate Catholicism but I don't hate Catholics. I mean you can hate Atheism but does that mean you hate Athiests? I just don't like Catholicism based on what it has done in the past and the present.
Byron,
I actually don't hate anything. Hate wouldn't be what God wants people to feel. I am curious though as to which protestant denomination you feel adheres most to the Bible?
I actually don't hate anything. Hate wouldn't be what God wants people to feel. I am curious though as to which protestant denomination you feel adheres most to the Bible?
QUOTE (invasian @ Jun 7 2004, 03:41 PM)
Byron,
I actually don't hate anything. Hate wouldn't be what God wants people to feel. I am curious though as to which protestant denomination you feel adheres most to the Bible?
I actually don't hate anything. Hate wouldn't be what God wants people to feel. I am curious though as to which protestant denomination you feel adheres most to the Bible?
Actually the Bible says it is wrong to hate PEOPLE. But it is actually ok to hate ideas.
God hates sins but loves sinners.
In the Bible, Paul said to hate the stain on people's clothes but do not hate the people themselves.
The Church I think best follows the Bible is the one that does the following.
1)Loves God with all their heart,mind, soul and strength.
2)Loves their neighbours as much as they love themselves.
Anyone that follows those 2 commandments is not far from the Kingdom of heaven.
Thus any Church that follows that truly with their hearts is truly a church of God.
Churches that command it's people to fight and slaughter and forcely convert others is breaking the 2nd most important commandment and the 1st as well, because they are obeying the commandments of the leaders and disobeying the commandments of God showing that they love their leaders more than they love God and thus break the first commandment.
Byron,
Thanks.
Thanks.
Ok.
Byron,
I didn't really want to reply...but again, I felt the need to clarify some things. First, in any Church, there are sinners and men of evil. Paul and Christ himself warned us that there would be a few ravenous wolves among Church leaders (Acts 20:29; Matt. 7:15). This is not to say that I agree with some of your assertions about what occurred in history (like Pope Pius being Hitler's personal Pope). I am saying that there are sinners in any church. If you believe that the the bad deeds discount Catholicism as a good tree for God, then look at the history of Martin Luther and Calvin and you would have to come to the same conclusion. Luther and Calvin both endorsed the right of the state to protect society by purging false religion. In fact, Calvin not only banished from Geneva those who did not share his views, he permitted and in some cases ordered others to be executed for "heresy" (e.g. Jacques Gouet, tortured and beheaded in 1547; and Michael Servetus, burned at the stake in 1553). In England and Ireland, Reformers engaged in their own ruthless inquisitions and executions. Estimates indicate that thousands of English and Irish Catholics were put to death—many by being hanged, drawn, and quartered—for practicing the Catholic faith and refusing to become Protestant. An even greater number were forced to flee to the Continent for their safety.
The fact that the Protestant Reformers also created inquisitions to root out Catholics and others who did not fall into line with the doctrines of the local Protestant sect shows that the existence of an inquisition does not prove that a movement is not of God. Protestants cannot make this claim against Catholics without having it backfire on themselves. Neither can Catholics make such a charge against Protestants. The truth of a particular system of belief must be decided on other grounds, and defamatory charges against one side or another only generate too much heat, not enough light.
EDIT: Alright...I'll just add that you believe what you believe and I believe what I believe. Suffice it to say, you and I both have strong feelings about our particular beliefs. But remember, (and this includes myself) that there are always two (at least) sides to every story. It is obvious that this discussion could go on and on and on...but I shall leave it at this (for real this time). I hope that you continue to grow closer to God and that your faith be challenged. I will see you around the boards.
~Quynh
I didn't really want to reply...but again, I felt the need to clarify some things. First, in any Church, there are sinners and men of evil. Paul and Christ himself warned us that there would be a few ravenous wolves among Church leaders (Acts 20:29; Matt. 7:15). This is not to say that I agree with some of your assertions about what occurred in history (like Pope Pius being Hitler's personal Pope). I am saying that there are sinners in any church. If you believe that the the bad deeds discount Catholicism as a good tree for God, then look at the history of Martin Luther and Calvin and you would have to come to the same conclusion. Luther and Calvin both endorsed the right of the state to protect society by purging false religion. In fact, Calvin not only banished from Geneva those who did not share his views, he permitted and in some cases ordered others to be executed for "heresy" (e.g. Jacques Gouet, tortured and beheaded in 1547; and Michael Servetus, burned at the stake in 1553). In England and Ireland, Reformers engaged in their own ruthless inquisitions and executions. Estimates indicate that thousands of English and Irish Catholics were put to death—many by being hanged, drawn, and quartered—for practicing the Catholic faith and refusing to become Protestant. An even greater number were forced to flee to the Continent for their safety.
The fact that the Protestant Reformers also created inquisitions to root out Catholics and others who did not fall into line with the doctrines of the local Protestant sect shows that the existence of an inquisition does not prove that a movement is not of God. Protestants cannot make this claim against Catholics without having it backfire on themselves. Neither can Catholics make such a charge against Protestants. The truth of a particular system of belief must be decided on other grounds, and defamatory charges against one side or another only generate too much heat, not enough light.
EDIT: Alright...I'll just add that you believe what you believe and I believe what I believe. Suffice it to say, you and I both have strong feelings about our particular beliefs. But remember, (and this includes myself) that there are always two (at least) sides to every story. It is obvious that this discussion could go on and on and on...but I shall leave it at this (for real this time). I hope that you continue to grow closer to God and that your faith be challenged. I will see you around the boards.
~Quynh
QUOTE (Byron @ Jun 7 2004, 10:28 AM)
In the old testament before Jesus Christ, God gave mankind a set of rules that he or she must obey to be saved. If one rule is broken than they cannot be saved. Overtime not one single person was able to obey every single rule. So by God's law they cannot be saved, and God cannot make exceptions and cannot go back on his word.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
So what can God do? Well in the Old testament one person can avoid hell if someone who is sinless takes their place for them.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
So God being as great and wise as he is, has a plan to save all of humanity. He decided to come down to Earth as a man, and sacrifice himself to save all of humanity.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You cannot EARN salvation in Christianity, since everyone has sinned once and thus fall short the glory of Christ which is why only forgiveness by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ will save us.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Vietnamese Catholics invited them to "protect" them from the Buddhists and the French missionaries used that opporutnity to tell the French public to conquer Vietnam for God.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
So what can God do? Well in the Old testament one person can avoid hell if someone who is sinless takes their place for them.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
So God being as great and wise as he is, has a plan to save all of humanity. He decided to come down to Earth as a man, and sacrifice himself to save all of humanity.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You cannot EARN salvation in Christianity, since everyone has sinned once and thus fall short the glory of Christ which is why only forgiveness by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ will save us.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Vietnamese Catholics invited them to "protect" them from the Buddhists and the French missionaries used that opporutnity to tell the French public to conquer Vietnam for God.
Ok thanks for the reply. I'm still confused on some parts thoughg and it would be great if you could clarify.
My question is gonna be in relation to the segments of the quote.
First section: Why would God create rules bound to be broken and inflict sin upon people. If God was all powerful couldn't he save himself trouble from coming down as Jesus by simply creating a better "prototype" of the world-laws. In the end God wants to save, so why must he bypass the stage in which sin causes suffering and not simply create a potential to sin in the first place.
Second section: Same sorta confusion here - didn't God create hell? Why would an all loving God create the worst place of all for his children. If it were up to me I would make hell in the first place. Some people say that hell is a result of free-will and human sin, but according to the Bible, hell was made before Adam and Eve (am I correct?)
Third section: If God already sacrificed himself and like you said with infinite ability, then why would the people who partook in the inquisition have anything to worry about, after all the infinite power of God should engulf them whether they believe or not.
Forth section: If you can't earn salvation, and Jesus saved us all, then why does sin and hell still exist - are they beyond the powers of Jesus?
Last section: What do you meant by protection from "Buddhists"?
hmmmmmmmm
OK cool...though I'm still iffy.
1) The bottle neck is not freewill, but it's the existence of sin from a creator. Why didn't God just make humans like God. God has freewill but can't sin. So that is proof that freewill is not the problem and sin cannot be equated with freewill. God could have designed humans to have freewill and simultaneously not have the potential to sin couldn't he?
2, 3, 4) Why is there always a catch "if they confess and repent their sins". Can't God just forget that litte part and save them no matter what they do or who they believe in. "In the Bible hell is rarely described and the only description I read about it is that is a place without God and no light, since God is light." - Wasn't God the one who made hell?
5) It's not the Emperor didn't like western religion, but the inside workings of missionaries tended to comprimise the security of the nation. Like you said the French came and wasted us - so that's what the Emperor was afraid of though I'm not saying the Emporer is a good guy, but the inner workings of international affairs back then was iffy to the western world because the Europeans were looking to take over VN and colonize it. Personally I do not like killing, but you assertion that the only reason the Empror killed was his prejudice is highly debateable. Also Buddhist don't attack people - that's just too funny. "Since most Vietnaemse are Buddhist then I'm sure it was Buddhist who attacked them." That's too broad of a claim Byron.
1) The bottle neck is not freewill, but it's the existence of sin from a creator. Why didn't God just make humans like God. God has freewill but can't sin. So that is proof that freewill is not the problem and sin cannot be equated with freewill. God could have designed humans to have freewill and simultaneously not have the potential to sin couldn't he?
2, 3, 4) Why is there always a catch "if they confess and repent their sins". Can't God just forget that litte part and save them no matter what they do or who they believe in. "In the Bible hell is rarely described and the only description I read about it is that is a place without God and no light, since God is light." - Wasn't God the one who made hell?
5) It's not the Emperor didn't like western religion, but the inside workings of missionaries tended to comprimise the security of the nation. Like you said the French came and wasted us - so that's what the Emperor was afraid of though I'm not saying the Emporer is a good guy, but the inner workings of international affairs back then was iffy to the western world because the Europeans were looking to take over VN and colonize it. Personally I do not like killing, but you assertion that the only reason the Empror killed was his prejudice is highly debateable. Also Buddhist don't attack people - that's just too funny. "Since most Vietnaemse are Buddhist then I'm sure it was Buddhist who attacked them." That's too broad of a claim Byron.
QUOTE (vn1234 @ Jun 7 2004, 05:36 PM)
OK cool...though I'm still iffy.
1) The bottle neck is not freewill, but it's the existence of sin from a creator. Why didn't God just make humans like God. God has freewill but can't sin. So that is proof that freewill is not the problem and sin cannot be equated with freewill. God could have designed humans to have freewill and simultaneously not have the potential to sin couldn't he?
2, 3, 4) Why is there always a catch "if they confess and repent their sins". Can't God just forget that litte part and save them no matter what they do or who they believe in. "In the Bible hell is rarely described and the only description I read about it is that is a place without God and no light, since God is light." - Wasn't God the one who made hell?
5) It's not the Emperor didn't like western religion, but the inside workings of missionaries tended to comprimise the security of the nation. Like you said the French came and wasted us - so that's what the Emperor was afraid of though I'm not saying the Emporer is a good guy, but the inner workings of international affairs back then was iffy to the western world because the Europeans were looking to take over VN and colonize it. Personally I do not like killing, but you assertion that the only reason the Empror killed was his prejudice is highly debateable. Also Buddhist don't attack people - that's just too funny. "Since most Vietnaemse are Buddhist then I'm sure it was Buddhist who attacked them." That's too broad of a claim Byron.
1) The bottle neck is not freewill, but it's the existence of sin from a creator. Why didn't God just make humans like God. God has freewill but can't sin. So that is proof that freewill is not the problem and sin cannot be equated with freewill. God could have designed humans to have freewill and simultaneously not have the potential to sin couldn't he?
2, 3, 4) Why is there always a catch "if they confess and repent their sins". Can't God just forget that litte part and save them no matter what they do or who they believe in. "In the Bible hell is rarely described and the only description I read about it is that is a place without God and no light, since God is light." - Wasn't God the one who made hell?
5) It's not the Emperor didn't like western religion, but the inside workings of missionaries tended to comprimise the security of the nation. Like you said the French came and wasted us - so that's what the Emperor was afraid of though I'm not saying the Emporer is a good guy, but the inner workings of international affairs back then was iffy to the western world because the Europeans were looking to take over VN and colonize it. Personally I do not like killing, but you assertion that the only reason the Empror killed was his prejudice is highly debateable. Also Buddhist don't attack people - that's just too funny. "Since most Vietnaemse are Buddhist then I'm sure it was Buddhist who attacked them." That's too broad of a claim Byron.
1) Ok how can you have love without freewill?
Forcing people to love you is not true love. True love only comes with free will.
God has freewill and will not sin doesn't mean freewill is no problem and doesn't affect love.
God has freewill and CHOOSES not to sin with his freewill. Freewill does determine how you feel. We are lucky God decided to be a merciful and loving God. He could have chosen to be otherwise.
The fact that we exist is good evidence that God is loving.
If you don't have love or aren't love, then why bother to create human beings? Yes you can make them to be your servants but why would God need servants when he can do anything instantly?
It's because he wants TRUE LOVE based on Freewill and that's why he bothered to create us in the first place.
One is the lonliest number and God doesn't want to be lonely and wants true love.
2) There is no passage in the bible that states God created hell. We don't even know what hell is, or if it's a place or even an idea.
As for God skipping things to save anyone no matter what first that would be
1)a lie. God already said he will only save those who love him and want forgivness. If God saved everyone no matter what is in their hearts, then God will be breaking his word and God is not a liar.
2)Even if God could have never have said that he will only save those he love him remember this, God doesn't send anyone to hell. People send themselves to hell by what is in their hearts. It isn't God's fault.
In fact these people never loved God and never wanted to have anything to do with him.
So in the end God is just doing what these people always wanted and separating himself from them.
So basically God is basically granting them their wish of always wanting to be apart from God. God doesn't send people to hell, people send themselves to hell because during their lives they never wanted anything to do with him and thus God will give them what they always wanted for eternity.
Those who want to always love God and always want to be with him get their wish for eternity.
Those who don't, get their wish for eternity and stay away from God for all eternity.
In the end everyone gets what they always wanted. What you sow in life, you will reap in death.
Of course, but...
Why can't God just make duplicates of God (I didn't say servants): they all have freewill and true love and will never sin. I never said to "force people to love you". I said why can't humans have freewill and not fall into sin like how God does it? Diversity still exists, but suffering doesn't. If it were up to me to create a world and I was all powerful, I would create everyone on the same par - no less, anything else would be mean - what would you do? When you have a child would you cripple its arm, or would you wish it to have all the options available in life like you? Humans are a creation of God and humans were designed to be crippled by sin - why cripple them in the first place - why not make them like God?
"God already said he will only save those who love him and want forgivness." - Why would God say this in the first place. If it were up to me I would say: "God will only save all." I can't stand to see people suffering in my creation (the world) just because they didn't love me or want forgiveness - that's just cruel. And about that lying part - can't God just erase that memory part on all humans - shabang! and it's gone.
"We don't even know what hell is, or if it's a place or even an idea." - "People send themselves to hell by what is in their hearts." So if you have no clue - then how can you be sure that humans actually go there.
"Those who don't, get their wish for eternity and stay away from God for all eternity." So you're saying if you're child wanted to become a serial killer you woul let him/her do it! Or would you use all your strength and try to change course?
Why can't God just make duplicates of God (I didn't say servants): they all have freewill and true love and will never sin. I never said to "force people to love you". I said why can't humans have freewill and not fall into sin like how God does it? Diversity still exists, but suffering doesn't. If it were up to me to create a world and I was all powerful, I would create everyone on the same par - no less, anything else would be mean - what would you do? When you have a child would you cripple its arm, or would you wish it to have all the options available in life like you? Humans are a creation of God and humans were designed to be crippled by sin - why cripple them in the first place - why not make them like God?
"God already said he will only save those who love him and want forgivness." - Why would God say this in the first place. If it were up to me I would say: "God will only save all." I can't stand to see people suffering in my creation (the world) just because they didn't love me or want forgiveness - that's just cruel. And about that lying part - can't God just erase that memory part on all humans - shabang! and it's gone.
"We don't even know what hell is, or if it's a place or even an idea." - "People send themselves to hell by what is in their hearts." So if you have no clue - then how can you be sure that humans actually go there.
"Those who don't, get their wish for eternity and stay away from God for all eternity." So you're saying if you're child wanted to become a serial killer you woul let him/her do it! Or would you use all your strength and try to change course?
um, kinda a dumb question, but what si the point of this thread, i thought we had one like this.
education my friend - understand other peoples views
i mean millions of people argue abt this for thousands of years, and they just keep on going....................., yet, they still fighting, sigh
yeah true - but me and Byron are just exchanging questions
QUOTE (vn1234 @ Jun 7 2004, 06:08 PM)
Of course, but...
Why can't God just make duplicates of God (I didn't say servants): they all have freewill and true love and will never sin. I never said to "force people to love you". I said why can't humans have freewill and not fall into sin like how God does it? Diversity still exists, but suffering doesn't. If it were up to me to create a world and I was all powerful, I would create everyone on the same par - no less, anything else would be mean - what would you do? When you have a child would you cripple its arm, or would you wish it to have all the options available in life like you? Humans are a creation of God and humans were designed to be crippled by sin - why cripple them in the first place - why not make them like God?
"God already said he will only save those who love him and want forgivness." - Why would God say this in the first place. If it were up to me I would say: "God will only save all." I can't stand to see people suffering in my creation (the world) just because they didn't love me or want forgiveness - that's just cruel. And about that lying part - can't God just erase that memory part on all humans - shabang! and it's gone.
"We don't even know what hell is, or if it's a place or even an idea." - "People send themselves to hell by what is in their hearts." So if you have no clue - then how can you be sure that humans actually go there.
"Those who don't, get their wish for eternity and stay away from God for all eternity." So you're saying if you're child wanted to become a serial killer you woul let him/her do it! Or would you use all your strength and try to change course?
Why can't God just make duplicates of God (I didn't say servants): they all have freewill and true love and will never sin. I never said to "force people to love you". I said why can't humans have freewill and not fall into sin like how God does it? Diversity still exists, but suffering doesn't. If it were up to me to create a world and I was all powerful, I would create everyone on the same par - no less, anything else would be mean - what would you do? When you have a child would you cripple its arm, or would you wish it to have all the options available in life like you? Humans are a creation of God and humans were designed to be crippled by sin - why cripple them in the first place - why not make them like God?
"God already said he will only save those who love him and want forgivness." - Why would God say this in the first place. If it were up to me I would say: "God will only save all." I can't stand to see people suffering in my creation (the world) just because they didn't love me or want forgiveness - that's just cruel. And about that lying part - can't God just erase that memory part on all humans - shabang! and it's gone.
"We don't even know what hell is, or if it's a place or even an idea." - "People send themselves to hell by what is in their hearts." So if you have no clue - then how can you be sure that humans actually go there.
"Those who don't, get their wish for eternity and stay away from God for all eternity." So you're saying if you're child wanted to become a serial killer you woul let him/her do it! Or would you use all your strength and try to change course?
Like I said God is good and doesn't sin because it's HIS CHOICE.
If God created a bunch of people like God, how do you know 100% that they will not sin like God? Yes God can create them to force them to not sin but then that means they don't have freewill to sin or not.
God could have at anytime become evil if he wanted to, but with his freewill he decided to be loving and merciful.
And as for why God doesn't create everyone as powerful as God. lol like I said there could be some people who will decide to sin and will commit atrocities like creating their own humans and delight in tormenting them.
And what can God do about this? Since God created them as powerful as himself than he can't stop all of them.
So God has to create them to be weaker he is and put them on Earth as a TEST to see if they are forgiving and love him.
The Bible says that once you are accepted by God, you become part of his family and you become like God, like Jesus, and you end up being married to him and then we will love him for the rest of our days as one big family.
So I think God does want to create everyone the same, but he needs to give them freewill first and make them weaker than he is, to test them if they have good hearts or bad hearts. The ones with good hearts he makes them part of his family and everyone is equal, while the other ones go back to being nothing like they were before they were born.
"If God created a bunch of people like God, how do you know 100% that they will not sin like God?" - because you're 100% knowing - hence God.
"I said there could be some people who will decide to sin and will commit atrocities like creating their own humans and delight in tormenting them." But in my situation, no one creates sin, because the moment sin exists, the Godliness is debunked, and if Godliness is debunked, the nature of God was a fake in that individual. Once you choose to be a good God there's no turning evil right? If there were the potential to turn evil, then you are not all-knowing - potential is the phenomenon of an unknown hence the definition: Websters Dictionary - Potential existence means merely that the thing MAY be at ome time. By having a God that may have gone bad is a unconstant variable, and all unconstant variables carry a degree of uncertainty. The only way to be all-knowing and all-powerful is to not be bound by uncertainty - leading to a conclusion that God will never and never has the ability in the past to sin is a way to avoid potential and claim his absolute certainty.
"And what can God do about this? Since God created them as powerful as himself than he can't stop all of them." - If the other Gods sinned (did a mutiny on the original Gdo), automatically by definition (cause they sinned) they would lose Godliness (God doesn't sin) and once they are not Gods, they can no longer compete with God because it will be God vs ex-God.
"TEST" testing only comes because you're not all knowing. No one tests to see if fire is hot these days becasue we know. People test programs for bugs because we don't know. The inherent nature of a "test" is always an "answer". If God is supplying the "test" and humans are supplying the "answer", then who is smarter than who?
"I said there could be some people who will decide to sin and will commit atrocities like creating their own humans and delight in tormenting them." But in my situation, no one creates sin, because the moment sin exists, the Godliness is debunked, and if Godliness is debunked, the nature of God was a fake in that individual. Once you choose to be a good God there's no turning evil right? If there were the potential to turn evil, then you are not all-knowing - potential is the phenomenon of an unknown hence the definition: Websters Dictionary - Potential existence means merely that the thing MAY be at ome time. By having a God that may have gone bad is a unconstant variable, and all unconstant variables carry a degree of uncertainty. The only way to be all-knowing and all-powerful is to not be bound by uncertainty - leading to a conclusion that God will never and never has the ability in the past to sin is a way to avoid potential and claim his absolute certainty.
"And what can God do about this? Since God created them as powerful as himself than he can't stop all of them." - If the other Gods sinned (did a mutiny on the original Gdo), automatically by definition (cause they sinned) they would lose Godliness (God doesn't sin) and once they are not Gods, they can no longer compete with God because it will be God vs ex-God.
"TEST" testing only comes because you're not all knowing. No one tests to see if fire is hot these days becasue we know. People test programs for bugs because we don't know. The inherent nature of a "test" is always an "answer". If God is supplying the "test" and humans are supplying the "answer", then who is smarter than who?
QUOTE (vn1234 @ Jun 7 2004, 06:37 PM)
"If God created a bunch of people like God, how do you know 100% that they will not sin like God?" - because you're 100% knowing - hence God.
"I said there could be some people who will decide to sin and will commit atrocities like creating their own humans and delight in tormenting them." But in my situation, no one creates sin, because the moment sin exists, the Godliness is debunked, and if Godliness is debunked, the nature of God was a fake in that individual. Once you choose to be a good God there's no turning evil right? If there were the potential to turn evil, then you are not all-knowing - potential is the phenomenon of an unknown hence the definition: Websters Dictionary - Potential existence means merely that the thing MAY be at ome time. By having a God that may have gone bad is a unconstant variable, and all unconstant variables carry a degree of uncertainty. The only way to be all-knowing and all-powerful is to not be bound by uncertainty - leading to a conclusion that God will never and never has the ability in the past to sin is a way to avoid potential and claim his absolute certainty.
"And what can God do about this? Since God created them as powerful as himself than he can't stop all of them." - If the other Gods sinned (did a mutiny on the original Gdo), automatically by definition (cause they sinned) they would lose Godliness (God doesn't sin) and once they are not Gods, they can no longer compete with God because it will be God vs ex-God.
"TEST" testing only comes because you're not all knowing. No one tests to see if fire is hot these days becasue we know. People test programs for bugs because we don't know. The inherent nature of a "test" is always an "answer". If God is supplying the "test" and humans are supplying the "answer", then who is smarter than who?
"I said there could be some people who will decide to sin and will commit atrocities like creating their own humans and delight in tormenting them." But in my situation, no one creates sin, because the moment sin exists, the Godliness is debunked, and if Godliness is debunked, the nature of God was a fake in that individual. Once you choose to be a good God there's no turning evil right? If there were the potential to turn evil, then you are not all-knowing - potential is the phenomenon of an unknown hence the definition: Websters Dictionary - Potential existence means merely that the thing MAY be at ome time. By having a God that may have gone bad is a unconstant variable, and all unconstant variables carry a degree of uncertainty. The only way to be all-knowing and all-powerful is to not be bound by uncertainty - leading to a conclusion that God will never and never has the ability in the past to sin is a way to avoid potential and claim his absolute certainty.
"And what can God do about this? Since God created them as powerful as himself than he can't stop all of them." - If the other Gods sinned (did a mutiny on the original Gdo), automatically by definition (cause they sinned) they would lose Godliness (God doesn't sin) and once they are not Gods, they can no longer compete with God because it will be God vs ex-God.
"TEST" testing only comes because you're not all knowing. No one tests to see if fire is hot these days becasue we know. People test programs for bugs because we don't know. The inherent nature of a "test" is always an "answer". If God is supplying the "test" and humans are supplying the "answer", then who is smarter than who?
Actually God is all knowing and actually doesn't need to test you. But the reason why gives you a test is for YOUR SAKE, and not his.
How would you like it if God said this to you the moment you were born:
"Uh I can forsee into the future that you will not love me the moment you die, so uh there is no point in testing you since I know that you will be a sinner, now I will have to separate you from me."
Now would you accept this? Would you be willing to just take your punishment(whatever it is) based on something you haven't done yet? No you probably would not accept this.
So God "tests" you first so that you can be satisified and know that you are 100% to blame for being separated from him.
God knows what will happen in the future, but he is not gonna punish people for something they haven't done yet.
"God knows what will happen in the future, but he is not gonna punish people for something they haven't done yet." - by saying this then there is the negation of free will. Even if God says "Uh I can forsee into the future that you will not love me the moment you die, so uh there is no point in testing you since I know that you will be a sinner, now I will have to separate you from me." - there is always free will to change right? if this is so then God is only presuming and doesn't know for sure. If he does know for sure, then that individual doesn't have a chance at free will and the notion of free will is fake. If God can foretell your future, then free will is non-existent and his creations are in turn true "servants" without a choice. By injecting free will into the sceme of things, God cannot pinpoint the future because it is up to the individual to bend his free will.
[quote=Byron,Jun 7 2004, 03:51 PM] [/QUOTE]
God hates sins but loves sinners. [/quote]
That's a pathetic indirect excuse to hate the person.
God hates sins but loves sinners. [/quote]
That's a pathetic indirect excuse to hate the person.
QUOTE (vn1234 @ Jun 7 2004, 06:55 PM)
"God knows what will happen in the future, but he is not gonna punish people for something they haven't done yet." - by saying this then there is the negation of free will. Even if God says "Uh I can forsee into the future that you will not love me the moment you die, so uh there is no point in testing you since I know that you will be a sinner, now I will have to separate you from me." - there is always free will to change right? if this is so then God is only presuming and doesn't know for sure. If he does know for sure, then that individual doesn't have a chance at free will and the notion of free will is fake. If God can foretell your future, then free will is non-existent and his creations are in turn true "servants" without a choice. By injecting free will into the sceme of things, God cannot pinpoint the future because it is up to the individual to bend his free will.
Now your debating whether destiny can be changed or not. That is something different than what we have been discussing and there are many debates about whether one can change his destiny or is forced to live it out.
There are many arguments on both sides.
But in the end I have answered most of your questions as best as I can, and I wouldn't mind turning the tables on Buddhism and asking some logical questions of my own.
No problem sharing is caring!
I'll be back in a jiffy though - gonna log off and eat
just post your questions.
I'll be back in a jiffy though - gonna log off and eat
just post your questions.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.