Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Superior Hope | Heb 11:40 | Ancient | 127255 | ||
EdB, You asked: "Was the church responsible for Spanish Inquisition, the Crusades, the Salem Witch Trials, The Papacy, Confessionals, Indulgences, and many other horrible thing as you put it or was it corrupt men that acted in the name of the church?" The answer is yes, the church was responsible. The orthodox views of the time declared Jews heretics and no longer worthy of human rights or life. The orthodox views of the time declared the Muslims heathens and no longer worthy of human rights or life. Christian orthodox views of the time declared people with moles, strange or reclusive behavior, or of a different point of view to be no longer worthy of human rights or life. The orthodox Christian views of the time determined a heirarchy in the church that created a situation conducive to being a respector of persons. The orthodox Christian views of the time declared that the Pope had to forgive sins, and that dirty rotten sinners ought to pay indulgences in order to get that forgiveness. The orthodox Christian views of the time declared that people needed to confess sins to a man, because they did not have access to God directly. Whether or not man's corruption did it, it all came from a poor interpretation of scripture, and the orthodox views of the time were responsible for justifying the actions. If those in control had followed the true doctrine of brotherly love, the witch trials wouldn't have happened, the Crusades wouldn't have happened, indulgences wouldn't have happened, the Inquisition wouldn't have happened. Cortez slaughtered the Aztecs because they didn't convert to Chritianity. And this, of course, because they didn't speak his language and had no idea what he was saying. Now this: "Love without restraint quickly runs amuck." Perhaps the kind of love you know runs amuck. The love of Christ is described in 1 Corinthians 13, and such does not run amuck. Love never fails according to what the Bible says. You wrote: "You talk about my pride my arrogance. It is not me standing outside of orthodoxy saying your all wrong! I know the correct answer! And if you follow me I will lead you to the truth!" Ed, if you don't recognize your arrogant attitude by this, your very own statement, then I don't know what else to say. If you don't recognize your pride in not considering anything I've said, disregarding the absolute values of scripture as I have presented to you, then I don' tknow what else to say. Call me names if you please. I'm pretty much done talking to you. This is a one-sided debate. I didn't come to you, you came to me. What this all boils down to is this: I think that it is not a commandment to go to church. You think it is. You have been attacking me. I have been defending against you. You want me to bend to your opinion, and because I do not, based upon a sound arguement and established precedent that you choose to ignore, you choose to insult me and call me names. So I'll tell you what. I'll give you what your pride demands: Ohhh, EdB, you're so absolutely right. How could I have ever been so misled as to believe that Christ set us free from law and tradition to establish love as the new doctrine. I am so terribly grateful that you have shown me the truth by giving me the commandment contrary to the precedent of Christ. Now that I have the commandment, the sin, taking occasion by the commandment, can work in me all manner of transgression. Again, I am thankful, for I was alive without the law, but now that you gave me the commandment, sin has revived and killed me. I was sooooo wrong to believe in righteousness by Christ and to let no man be my judge in regard to holy days or sabbaths. Truly, I thought righteousness was by faith, but now you've shown me better, that I can have all the benefits of being fallen from grace by standing on my own righteousness through works. This was sarcastic, but quite how I see it. You want to be right and to have me admit you are right. This thing is not going to happen if I disagree with you, and for good reasons at that. So, let me ask you one more time ... please stop insulting me and trying to force your opinion on me. I didn't want to talk about this with you because we are not going to agree. And it all comes down to the passage in Hebrews, of which we have differed interpretations based on one understanding or another. I'm sorry, but you will not convince me that such a passage that is clearly an exhortation to me is the commandment that it clearly is to you. Understand? Ancient |
||||||
2 | Superior Hope | Heb 11:40 | Stultis the Fool | 127257 | ||
I have posted this in several places to make sure it adequately addresses the problem at hand. EdB... Speaking as someone who was viewing this thread from afar.... I see Ancient has stopped replying to you because of the brashness of your words and their intentional isulting qualities. I can see by this post that your personal crusade to ridicule him has not been assuaged. I am not yet tried in my patience, so I will respond to you on his behalf because you have hounded him to weakness. You are accusatory, your opinions and judgement and condemnation are completely unfounded. You are debating him... or should I say baiting him, specifically for the purpose of strife. For this reason you are become the burning tongue of fire. He has pleaded with you to refrain from your attacks, and you have instead intensified your pursuit of him. Christ tells us we will know a vine by its fruits. I should sincerely hope that the wrotten fruit you are hurling is something you picked up from the ground, and not at all the culmination of the flower of your faith. I should have this hope because while there is life, there is hope. However, I am not so naive, and I recognize that you refuse to concede one inch to his obvious logic, despite the scripture he most accurately quotes, despite his genuine attitude of love for those to whom he writes (even you), despite the fact that the wisdom he subscribes to is easily entreated, despite the fact that the wisdom he subscribes to is sound and without hypocracy, and despite the fact that he is BEGGING you to stop being a stumbling block before him. EdB, I will conclude my thoughts above with your own words: "I think that clearly shows there is something fundamentally amiss in this person." |
||||||