Originally posted by Teallaura
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Christianity 201 Guidelines
orthodox Christians only.
Discussion on matters of general mainstream evangelical Christian theology that do not fit within Theology 201. Have some spiritual gifts ceased today? Is the KJV the only viable translation for the church today? In what sense are the books of the bible inspired and what are those books? Church government? Modern day prophets and apostles?
This forum is primarily for Christians to discuss matters of Christian doctrine, and is not the area for debate between atheists (or those opposing orthodox Christianity) and Christians. Inquiring atheists (or sincere seekers/doubters/unorthodox) seeking only Christian participation and having demonstrated a manner that does not seek to undermine the orthodox Christian faith of others are also welcome, but must seek Moderator permission first. When defining “Christian” or "orthodox" for purposes of this section, we mean persons holding to the core essentials of the historic Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment. Persons not holding to these core doctrines are welcome to participate in the Comparative Religions section without restriction, in Theology 201 as regards to the nature of God and salvation with limited restrictions, and in Christology for issues surrounding the person of Christ and the Trinity. Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.
Additionally and rarely, there may be some topics or lines of discussion that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream orthodox doctrine (in general Christian circles or in the TheologyWeb community) or that deny certain core values that are the Christian convictions of forum leadership that may be more appropriately placed within Unorthodox Theology 201. NO personal offense should be taken by such discretionary decision for none is intended. While inerrancy is NOT considered a requirement for posting in this section, a general respect for the Bible text and a respect for the inerrantist position of others is requested.
The Tweb rules apply here like they do everywhere at Tweb, if you haven't read them, now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
Discussion on matters of general mainstream evangelical Christian theology that do not fit within Theology 201. Have some spiritual gifts ceased today? Is the KJV the only viable translation for the church today? In what sense are the books of the bible inspired and what are those books? Church government? Modern day prophets and apostles?
This forum is primarily for Christians to discuss matters of Christian doctrine, and is not the area for debate between atheists (or those opposing orthodox Christianity) and Christians. Inquiring atheists (or sincere seekers/doubters/unorthodox) seeking only Christian participation and having demonstrated a manner that does not seek to undermine the orthodox Christian faith of others are also welcome, but must seek Moderator permission first. When defining “Christian” or "orthodox" for purposes of this section, we mean persons holding to the core essentials of the historic Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment. Persons not holding to these core doctrines are welcome to participate in the Comparative Religions section without restriction, in Theology 201 as regards to the nature of God and salvation with limited restrictions, and in Christology for issues surrounding the person of Christ and the Trinity. Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.
Additionally and rarely, there may be some topics or lines of discussion that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream orthodox doctrine (in general Christian circles or in the TheologyWeb community) or that deny certain core values that are the Christian convictions of forum leadership that may be more appropriately placed within Unorthodox Theology 201. NO personal offense should be taken by such discretionary decision for none is intended. While inerrancy is NOT considered a requirement for posting in this section, a general respect for the Bible text and a respect for the inerrantist position of others is requested.
The Tweb rules apply here like they do everywhere at Tweb, if you haven't read them, now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Joe Biden Denied Holy Communion...
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by KingsGambit View PostThe mortal sin distinction makes sense. I had wondered why politicians who support capital punishment aren't liable to lose Communion because the RCC also has a stance on that.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by mikewhitney View Postthis is an interesting issue...
should people be restricted from Christian practices due to their thoughts?
If you try to restrict people based on their ideas, then people may just be stifled from sharing what they think ... and then no others can teach such people more Christ-centered ideas (after someone has expressed bad doctrine).
I know I have worded this badly. People could bring up a lot of exceptions due to the way I worded this. Maybe someone will recognize what I am asking so that the concern can be expressed a bit better.
Part of the idea, in the Christian context, is that people are not supposed to be coerced into 'confessing' doctrines.
Remember, that joining a church is a voluntary act by the person. One would hope a person joining a church would take the time to understand the church's positions and decide he can abide by them. Certainly Biden was never forced to join the Catholic church and he's free to quit anytime he wants. (I'm assuming Biden is a Catholic in "good standing" at this time.)
On the whole, I think it's good when a church enforces their doctorinal positions when members don't abide by them. I would hope the church would keep the enforcement towards the essentials and leave room for disagreement in non-essentials."For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings." Hosea 6:6
"Theology can be an intellectual entertainment." Metropolitan Anthony Bloom
Comment
-
Originally posted by Thoughtful Monk View PostI think I understand what you're trying to say...
Remember, that joining a church is a voluntary act by the person. One would hope a person joining a church would take the time to understand the church's positions and decide he can abide by them. Certainly Biden was never forced to join the Catholic church and he's free to quit anytime he wants. (I'm assuming Biden is a Catholic in "good standing" at this time.)
On the whole, I think it's good when a church enforces their doctorinal positions when members don't abide by them. I would hope the church would keep the enforcement towards the essentials and leave room for disagreement in non-essentials.
"Fire is catching. If we burn, you burn with us!"
"I'm not going anywhere. I'm going to stay here and cause all kinds of trouble."
Katniss Everdeen
Christ our Passover has been sacrificed for us. Therefore let us keep the feast.
Comment
-
This is nothing new, folks. Here is an article from the NYT in 1990 about excommunication of politicians who take a pro-abortion stand.
https://www.nytimes.com/1990/06/15/n...-abortion.html
John Cardinal O'Connor warned Roman Catholic politicians yesterday that they risked being excommunicated from the Catholic Church if they were persistent in supporting a woman's right to abortion.
''For the common good,'' the Cardinal said, ''such Catholics must be warned that they are at risk of excommunication.''
Those at risk, he said, are Catholics who ''are perceived not only as treating church teaching on abortion with contempt, but helping to mulitply abortions by advocating legislation supporting abortion or by making public funds available for abortion.''
''If such action persists,'' he said, ''bishops may consider excommunication the only option.''
Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostI "was Catholic" when I was a young man, because I was in love with a Catholic girl. I talked to the priest ahead of time, and we worked it out.
When I told him I would have a hard time with communion because I didn't really believe that the wafer actually becomes the body of Christ, he kinda shrugged and said, "a lot of us don't either". Not sure who he meant by "us", but we agreed that when I received communion, following his "body of Christ?", my amen would signify, yes, that REPRESENTS the body of Christ.
Remember - I was just a kid back then.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Advocating for the performance of abortions would disqualify someone for communion, no doubts bout it. But being "pro-choice" doesn't inherently mean that. Believing that abortion should be permitted is different from the idea that it should be performed.
You may think that's not a real distinction, but there's no shortage of things that people consider immoral but still think that, for various reasons, should be legal. How many here would advocate that refusing to believe in Christianity be criminalized? And since we're talking about Catholics, Augustine and Aquinas believed there were merits to legalizing prostitution (Aquinas here approvingly quotes Augustine's "If you do away with harlots, the world will be convulsed with lust" remark) despite obviously considering prostitution to be immoral.
So while I would find it questionable to withhold communion simply because of someone having a pro-choice stance (especially when we consider that in politics one may be forced to take positions they are not in full agreement with), if that "pro-choice" stance includes support of policies that encourage--not merely permit--abortion, that would not be unreasonable stance for withholding communion. I'm not familiar enough with Biden's stance on the subject to weigh in on whether he has crossed that or not.
Comment
-
Catholics are supposed to be pro-life; that's just how that works. Not all are, obviously, but not all Catholics follow their official teaching on contraception, either. In Catholic theology sin is graded, and abortion is always a grave sin. In all likelihood I think many Catholics would argue that abortion is fundamentally different from other sorts of legal sins in that it always takes a human life. It is a point of no return in a way that prostitution or drunkenness isn't.
Now, communion is not regularly denied to layfolk who have some sort of passive belief in legal abortion or who vote Democrat (Catholics also have a very rigorous understanding of your relation to the sin affecting the gravity of it). When it comes to politicians, however, bishops and priests are regularly criticized for not taking a hardline stance on their very prominent parishioners who are not only calling themselves pro-choice, but actively engaging politics that pushes forward more liberal abortion policies. Their degree of culpability is generally considered much greater than the average voter, and their visibility also projects an image.
Not to mention how far left Democratic abortion policies have gone in recent years. General Democratic policy is so far beyond "safe, legal, and rare" that it's becoming more and more normal to actively advocate free-for-all policy.
"Fire is catching. If we burn, you burn with us!"
"I'm not going anywhere. I'm going to stay here and cause all kinds of trouble."
Katniss Everdeen
Christ our Passover has been sacrificed for us. Therefore let us keep the feast.
Comment
-
Originally posted by mikewhitney View Postthis is an interesting issue...
should people be restricted from Christian practices due to their thoughts?
If you try to restrict people based on their ideas, then people may just be stifled from sharing what they think ... and then no others can teach such people more Christ-centered ideas (after someone has expressed bad doctrine).
I know I have worded this badly. People could bring up a lot of exceptions due to the way I worded this. Maybe someone will recognize what I am asking so that the concern can be expressed a bit better.
Part of the idea, in the Christian context, is that people are not supposed to be coerced into 'confessing' doctrines.Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.
Comment
-
Originally posted by mikewhitney View Postthis is an interesting issue...
should people be restricted from Christian practices due to their thoughts?
If you try to restrict people based on their ideas, then people may just be stifled from sharing what they think ... and then no others can teach such people more Christ-centered ideas (after someone has expressed bad doctrine).
I know I have worded this badly. People could bring up a lot of exceptions due to the way I worded this. Maybe someone will recognize what I am asking so that the concern can be expressed a bit better.
Part of the idea, in the Christian context, is that people are not supposed to be coerced into 'confessing' doctrines."I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill
Comment
-
Originally posted by KingsGambit View PostWell, Paul kicked Hymenaeus and Alexander out of the church for "overthrowing the faith of others" by teaching heresy, and heresy is basically incorrect thought, so it's not inherently wrong. The idea that God does not exist is also a "thought",yet there are pastors in liberal denominations who have taught this as well.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostAnd Paul himself was barred (albeit temporarily) from joining the Church at Jerusalem until Barnabas stepped up and vouched for him.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostWell to be fair, Paul was a hand full!The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Thoughtful Monk, 03-15-2024, 06:19 PM
|
35 responses
166 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Cow Poke
Yesterday, 08:28 AM
|
||
Started by KingsGambit, 03-15-2024, 02:12 PM
|
4 responses
49 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 03-17-2024, 04:26 PM | ||
Started by Chaotic Void, 03-08-2024, 07:36 AM
|
10 responses
119 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by mikewhitney
03-13-2024, 06:38 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, 02-29-2024, 07:55 AM
|
14 responses
72 views
3 likes
|
Last Post
by Cow Poke
03-01-2024, 09:15 AM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, 02-28-2024, 11:56 AM
|
13 responses
60 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Cow Poke
03-01-2024, 07:26 AM
|
Comment