Pedophilia - The Next Taboo To Fall?

[Jedidiah]

The argument here is that, in Christian theology, ensoulement takes place at conception; this is a position based almost entirely on Greek philosophy and was largely formulated by St. Augustine of Hippo. It has no counterpart in Hebrew theology and certainly not in the OT, In Hebrew thought ensoulment takes place at first breath, as it did for Adam and Eve, not at conception. The Bible reflects the former POV not the latter.

Where in the Bible is ensoulment spelled out as taking place at conception? Where is ensoulment taught as a real thing?

[Tassman]

'Claim' is the operative word here.

"Claim" is the "operative word" for ALL Christians...including your lot.

[Terraceth]

The argument here is that, in Christian theology, ensoulement takes place at conception; this is a position based almost entirely on Greek philosophy and was largely formulated by St. Augustine of Hippo.

The claim this comes largely from Augustine doesn't hold up when one can easily find Christian statements prohibiting abortion prior to Augustine. Heck, the Didache is one of the earliest non-biblical Christian writings we have and it explicitly forbids it.

[Tassman]

Where in the Bible is ensoulment spelled out as taking place at conception? Where is ensoulment taught as a real thing?

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/art...ewish-thought/

[JonathanL]

You meant that they are not your sort of Christian. In fact Pew research reveals that the majority of Christians support homosexual relations AND abortion

You mean that they're not your sort of Christian. But they are the majority of people who claim to be Christian and their views carry as much weight as yours.

No, I meant exactly what I wrote.

But even if I accept your claim that they are the majority (ignoring for a moment the huge portion of them that are only nominally Christian, whose views on the matter can be completely disregarded) they would only be a majority when compared to all Christians currently living. From a historical perspective they're a microscopical minority.

[Starlight]

I thought Kiwimac was Anglican for some reason.

Well the Anglican church was historically the biggest Christian denomination here in New Zealand and was historically both left-wing and liberal, focusing heavily on the social-gospel, and was one of the primary reasons New Zealand's politics was at the politically-left-end of the Western world for decades (first to introduce universal health care after the USSR etc). Kiwimac's views are typical of what I would expect from a liberal Anglican here.

Though in recent decades, as more of the population has become non-religious, the Anglican church has lost a lot of people in the pews, and also the Anglican seminary in Sydney is conservative-Calvinist and the result was that the Anglican church in NZ has actually changed quite a lot over the last 20 years. They actually opposed same-sex marriage (after previously supporting gay rights in the 50s-70s). Though in the last couple of years they have come around, and it now looks like they are going to split, with ~90% of the Anglican churches currently in the process of coming to the position of officially endorsing same-sex marriages, and ~10% of the Anglican churches (largely those led/influenced by conservative Sydney Anglicans) splitting off from the rest over the issue and their refusal to go along with the majority.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if Kiwimac used to be a liberal Anglican and switched to Old Catholic (which I will confess to never having heard of until now) when the NZ Anglican communion changed to taking a non-liberal stance on gay rights ~7-10 years ago.

[Starlight]

But even if I accept your claim that they are the majority (ignoring for a moment the huge portion of them that are only nominally Christian, whose views on the matter can be completely disregarded) they would only be a majority when compared to all Christians currently living. From a historical perspective they're a microscopical minority.

Um, do you realize that due to rapid population expansion in recent decades, the number of people adults currently living is actually approximately the same as the number of people who lived to adulthood over the past 2000 years combined?

Give or take a little bit of fudging and approximation, it seems a reasonable estimate to say that about 50% of all Christian adults who have ever lived are alive today.

So any theory that Christians today should kow-tow to the viewpoints of prior Christians in history on the grounds that there were many magnitudes more of them than you, seems fundamentally flawed, because there weren't.

[JonathanL]

You meant that they are not your sort of Christian. In fact Pew research reveals that the majority of Christians support homosexual relations AND abortion

Um, do you realize that due to rapid population expansion in recent decades, the number of people adults currently living is actually approximately the same as the number of people who lived to adulthood over the past 2000 years combined?

Give or take a little bit of fudging and approximation, it seems a reasonable estimate to say that about 50% of all Christian adults who have ever lived are alive today.

So any theory that Christians today should kow-tow to the viewpoints of prior Christians in history on the grounds that there were many magnitudes more of them than you, seems fundamentally flawed, because there weren't.

I'll take your word for it. I knew the global population growth in modern times were explosive, but I wasn't aware that it was to such a degree.

Regardless, whether or not these so-called "Christians" are the majority or not (which I still do not think is the case if we remove everyone who is only nominally Christian), it still doesn't change the fact that Scripture is the standard to go by when judging if someone is a Christian or not, not majority opinion.

[Tassman]

I'll take your word for it. I knew the global population growth in modern times were explosive, but I wasn't aware that it was to such a degree.

Regardless, whether or not these so-called "Christians" are the majority or not (which I still do not think is the case if we remove everyone who is only nominally Christian), it still doesn't change the fact that Scripture is the standard to go by when judging if someone is a Christian or not, not majority opinion.

It's the interpretation of scripture that's the problem. Jesus himself never addresses the issue of homosexuality or abortion.

[Starlight]

Regardless, whether or not these so-called "Christians" are the majority or not (which I still do not think is the case if we remove everyone who is only nominally Christian)

You seem to be imagining that nominal Christians couldn't have existed in pre-modern periods. When the Roman Empire became officially Christian, do you think everyone in it was Christian, or do you accept that a good proportion of people would have been merely nominal Christians? When the entirety of Europe was officially Christian, do you think everyone in it were all True Believers, or do you accept a lot of people were merely nominal Christians?

I recall one history I was reading about the Eastern Orthodox church's interactions with the West centuries ago, and the historian commented that one particular Bishop whom the EO selected to lead their envoy was generally thought to be an atheist and that the EO of the time was tolerant of that... nominal Christians seem to have been around at all times in history.

it still doesn't change the fact that Scripture is the standard to go by when judging if someone is a Christian or not

Probably the majority of Christians both now and throughout history do not hold Scripture as the standard for judgment (i.e. Catholics, Orthodox, Anglican etc rate tradition, church teaching etc on par with it). What makes you able to dictate that Scripture is the sole standard for judging others?

[tabibito]

I'll take your word for it. I knew the global population growth in modern times were explosive, but I wasn't aware that it was to such a degree.

Regardless, whether or not these so-called "Christians" are the majority or not (which I still do not think is the case if we remove everyone who is only nominally Christian), it still doesn't change the fact that Scripture is the standard to go by when judging if someone is a Christian or not, not majority opinion.

Pretty close to exponential in most parts of the world.

[Starlight]

Pretty close to exponential in most parts of the world.

Yep...



It's why a few of those crazy libs have gotten a tad concerned about population growth, because if you extrapolate that graph forward a few centuries, that's a lot of people using resources.

[lilpixieofterror]

Yep...



It's why a few of those crazy libs have gotten a tad concerned about population growth, because if you extrapolate that graph forward a few centuries, that's a lot of people using resources.

I thought we were supposed to have starved to death 40 years ago.

[tabibito]

I thought we were supposed to have starved to death 40 years ago.

You mean ... you didn't read the memo?

[Cow Poke]

It's the interpretation of scripture that's the problem. Jesus himself never addresses the issue of homosexuality or abortion.

You really can't use the lack of words of Jesus in the Bible to prove he didn't address a particular topic. John tells us "there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written".