Do you believe in saints, that some people are more holy than you?
Religion, what's the point?
- Thread starter TheRedFlag
- Start date
Do you believe in saints, that some people are more holy than you?
Well you've not answered my question Grinner. For the record I'm not catholic but have no issues with members of the Catholic Church and I don't think Herman is a nutter and don't believe I ever said he was, just arrogant.
Of course I believe in Saints, of course there are a lot of people more holy than me. If I'm honest I can't say I'd believe in every saint that has been canonised, but then I don't know who all the saints are.
I know you're an anglican.
Which catholics on here made Herman out to be a nutter then Grinner?
The truly tragic aspect of this nonsense is that po' catlicks wuz sprinkling x-year-old Lourdes water on their severely ill nearest and dearest in hospital and giving them infections since it was heavily polluted.
Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace...
At least we would do it, and take responsibility for it. Instead of justifying the killing in the name of an imaginary deity.
Most people don't want to kill anybody, they want to go out with girls and sleep with them and then have normal life with bookends.
have not listened to S & G for some time...
And then you have Catholic priests...
...and you have scum in all walks of life and professions....
Older than S&G, it's G&D: 'Call it sad, call it funny but it's better than even money that the guy's only doin' it for some doll'.
I can help in identifying who the saints are. They're all those written in the Lamb's book of life. Because a saint is simply one who is consecrated to God the only question is how does one become consecrated to God? The Biblical answer is in Jesus Christ alone. The fact Rome declares a person a saint based on their works done in the flesh underlines the fact they preach a false gospel. If you think your works add one single bit to your righteousness in the sight of God, you are anathema. Paul called the Galatians precisely that because they had added one thing to the Gospel of Jesus Christ (circumcision). Imagine what adding all the sacraments and praying to the dead makes you in God's sight.
The moment you try to apologise for the Roman Catholic Church you deny the gospel. Contrary to what you have stated previously about me, oates, I don't say any of this out of arrogance but because it's the truth and my love has not grown so cold (like that of the world) that I withhold the truth from the lost and those going astray/who have gone astray within the Church.
The only dialogue that should be had with Catholics when it comes to theological matters is debate on the gospel because if it's not all about the gospel, our faith is in vain.
It is a rubbish list anyway and the only decent ones are stating the obvious.
Do you talk like this in real life?
Well duh. Yes of course.
Shows his anger towards the Christian church. Not quite sure about his solution though.
Feckin' great man. Such charisma. Should have been president.
See, this is what I'm saying Herman, you just splurge this stream of consciousness stuff out all over the place when no-one has even come anywhere near needing you to. Personally, along with arrogance I think you're confused.
You need to think about how you come across to people maybe.
I must say that I do admire your single-mindedness and adherence to what you believe to be the essence of christianity. I like the idea of there not being a hierarchy of holiness based on what you might do during your life.
Why don't you believe in the Eucharist? I thought that was generally accepted by all christians.
If religion helps those in need of a crutch then I guess it's OK....BUT it does seem a weird world to live in.
Can't get my head round it and the fact it causes so many problems I'm not sure it makes any sense at all.
Can't get my head round it and the fact it causes so many problems I'm not sure it makes any sense at all.
Difference between myself and Herman is that I wouldn't presume to say he is not a Christian. All Christians, of whatever church should respect each other's true intentions - all people of faith should do this. However, Herman seems hell-bent on dismissing the sincere and true beliefs of 1.2 billion Catholics across the world - he is saying that we are not Christians. I don't think the Archbishop of Canterbury would agree with him, or the Chief Rabbi, or the Secretary-General of the Council of Mosques, or any other senior figure who represents a major religion.
If you expect life to make any sense you're going to be sorely disappointed.
Besides, go to any inner city area and you'll find the regular church/mosque/whatever goers are often the least problematic.
Religion is the opium of the mind and some posters in this thread are clearly spacing out.
You can't see the logical connections I make in my posts or you just don't like the manner of my speech?
I am concerned for you, oates, because you don't seem to understand what motivates me when those in Christ should share the same motivation of giving the gospel to the lost. How dare any of us proclaim Christ and then refrain from giving the truth to others out of fear that they might not like us for it; it's simply a low view of God to fear man's rejection more than the Lord.
I am not saying this as your enemy but somebody who is solely committed to Christ. You will waste your life if you spend it worrying about the way other men view you, oates. You will achieve nothing for the Kingdom of God and you will achieve nothing in the world. As Elijah said in 1 Kings 18:21 “How long will you go limping between two different opinions? If the LORD is God, follow him; but if Baal, then follow him.”
Christ does not recognise the man who pretends to serve two masters. Revelation 3:16 "So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth." Christ wants all of you or no part with you.
I find your attitude grotesque because you whine about fellow Christians proclaiming the gospel as God gave it to us when there are more than 200 million Christians worldwide, in over 50 countries, being persecuted (that is unfairly denied their right to their faith on a state level), with many being tortured and killed simply for standing up for Christ. How appalled would each of them be to hear of the lukewarm Church in the west (which isn't persecuted) that is so timid and afraid of man's opinion that they won't stand up for Christ?
It's not me who is confused. I know where I stand. I stand with Christ and all those Christians who die for the right to say what I can say freely with the only cost being a few insults from those who disagree with me. Your problem is that you don't count the cost and so you are a hindrance to those who do.
Yes.
If someone adds any of their own righteousness to that of God, Paul describes them as anathema. Man's religious hierarchies and unholy babblings are a foul aroma to God. He hates them. I share his passionate dislike. I am a wretch saved by God's grace and mercy by faith alone in the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ. I am just as unworthy of God's grace as everyone else and that will be true until the day I die.
I made a post earlier in this thread addressing the Eucharist as a profoundly unbiblical practise. Christ calls us to break the bread and pour out the wine in remembrance of his one eternal sacrifice on the cross (the bread representing his body and the wine his blood). eating the bread and drinking the wine does not (and couldn't anyway) sacrifice the Lord again (Hebrews says it's impossible to re-sacrifice Christ and to hold him up to shame). Those who participate in the Echarist, relying on Rome's teachings around it - that the sacrifice of Christ can be repeated many times in the form of bread and wine and that physically eating the body and drinking the blood of Christ is necessary for salvation - are adding to the gospel. The gospel is simply this: that Christ died on the cross for our sins, conquering the forces of darkness and defeating death, and rose to new life so that those who trust in the one God sent (Christ) might have eternal life. If you take away from that or add one single thing, then you preach another gospel and Paul says in Galatians that the man who preaches another gospel is anathema. Not my criteria, but the Biblical criteria.
Last edited:
To paraphrase Karl Marx, he said that "Religion is the opiate of the masses". So I guess you just made that up yourself Essaux, jolly well done. When you say "some people" I think you should have the courage of your convictions and name them, otherwise it's a bit like the "They", you know, "They did it" or even "It was Them", a bit wishy washy, makes me always wonder who the They is, who the Them were. Bit of a cop out if you know what I mean.
Personally for those who see it as a bit of a crutch, well I've never found it particularly easy being a christian but I guess I'm a lot better off than those who've really been persecuted for their faith, I certainly don't see those christians given the choice of convert or die currently by IS in Iraq as taking the crutch or the easy way out, "Them" early christians being fed to the lions, "They" muslims even being persecuted during the Crusades. No, thank God that so far it's just the usual everyday ridicule. What is a bit harder is trying to keep the faith.
Oh do go and soak your head Herman, you won't get it through the door at this rate.
It has nothing to do with me and everything to do with the gospel.
Good for you Herman. Nice short paragraph.
How can you think that a variety of books, none of which were written at the time of the alleged life of Jesus and in some cases hundreds of years after, is the complete and absolute word of God? They obviously feed from each other but as they contradict each other how can any of them be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Even ignoring the fact the majority of the contents of the various bibles are obviously adaptations of far older religious mumbo jumbo?
Do you find people avoiding you and/or starting to sweat and looking around for the exit or someone they know to make excuses to get away from you? I'd run a mile.
And why would I want to paraphrase Karl Marx? I said what I said and I meant it exactly the way I said it.
As for naming the people, how about: anyone who believes in a supreme being of which it is impossible to determine whether such supreme being exists or not, from a scientific and rational point of view. (And no the Bible, Torah and Quran are not scientific evidence nor a rational explanation of the existence of a supreme being.) Just to be clear: this most certainly includes anyone who adheres to one of the three Abrahamic religions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
Is that clear enough?
It's a bit better Essaux. Always better to let people know where they stand don't you think? What evidence did I claim Essaux? We each have our own personal "evidence" however to get into the Kingdom of God requires Faith alone doesn't it?
Good God, how is oates getting bashed by both sides now? He's probably the most agreeable person in here.
This is the key, Wibble.
Careful RB
Honestly, I thought it was good old fashioned debate.
Oh no the wrath of Herman cometh...