Bluestars thread was sadly deleted but I thought I'd be worth resurrecting the thread due to the discussion the old thread attracted.

This is a non-denominial thread and non christians are welcome to discuss and have their say as well.

As in the old thread feel free to discuss anything relating to scripture, doctrine and even social issues affecting society including the churches stance on them.

i didnt delete the original thread. ive just "archived" it, because it was ruined by idiot posts.

Let the discussion begin...

http://www.cardmagnets.com/SouthPark/SPK18%20.JPG

Why is jesus portrayed as an aryan looking man, when all evidence points to him looking more Arabic or Middle Eastern?

why is his head so round? That looks like a cartoon person's head, not a real head.

@ sydney dude he is portrayed as looking like he is because thats what the romans thought he would look like. the image has just stuck.

@ jellyman, that is of the cartoon southpark where everyone has big head, round eyes ect..

Why is jesus portrayed as an aryan looking man, when all evidence points to him looking more Arabic or Middle Eastern?

jesus is potrayed as blond with blue eyes???

he has brown hair, like many jews. the images we get of jesus come from historical drawings europeans made. people tend to draw images similar to themselves. not too many european artists came across arabic looking people back then. they wouldn't know how to draw noneuropean people to begin with without being horribily arbitrery.

Well from the Catholic perspective (which I am obviously hahaha), the image we get of Jesus today comes from the face imprinted on the shroud of Turin.

As Catholics, we believe that the Shroud of Turin holds the imprinted face of Jesus. Being in the care of Spanish monks, it was preserved and ultimately set the standard amongst the Catholic world as the face of Jesus.

As to the skin colour, I guess that within the Christian Orthodox world, Jesus has transcended cultural limitations and has become an icon in the respective cultures he has played a huge role in (e.g. Armenian, Greek, Italian, Spanish.. etc.). Hence, for the local population, they changed Jesus's physical characteristics to make him more "local"

The Shroud of Turin's imprint, however, shows the features of a typical semetic man of the Middle East.

I guess that the change of colour in Jesus's representation (in the pre-Reformation days) I guess also had more of a symbolic representation ... white and black being symbols of purity and wisdom (just as the Ethiopians represented the Jews who brought Judaism to Ethiopia snow white, not as a representation of their skin colour, but to carry a theological message as people in the ancient world were mostly illiterate.

This is a non-denominial thread and non christians are welcome to discuss and have their say as well.


yeah, sure...

religion always creates trouble....

religion always creates trouble....

Depends on what you mean by that. I suppose it could likewise be argued that lack of religion always causes trouble.

yeah, sure...

In my experience it's the other way around - religionists being shut down.

I think what Chris was getting at is that some people get really defensive, and hence offensive, if they hear something they don't like. That's why these threads are bad news.

I think what Chris was getting at is that some people get really defensive, and hence offensive, if they hear something they don't like. That's why these threads are bad news.

I agree. However, forumers get defensive when discussing urban development. I think we just suffer from an oversensitivity to discussion of religious matters. Granted, we get a longer rope on this particular forum.

jellyman, that is of the cartoon southpark where everyone has big head, round eyes ect..

Thanks, I'm sure he thought that was a genuine photo of him. What would everyone do without you to clear things up...

jellyman, that is of the cartoon southpark where everyone has big head, round eyes ect..

Thanks, I'm sure he thought that was a genuine photo of him. What would everyone do without you to clear things up...

tee-hee

@ sydney dude he is portrayed as looking like he is because thats what the romans thought he would look like. the image has just stuck.

@ jellyman, that is of the cartoon southpark where everyone has big head, round eyes ect..
Evidence of your claim please.

Why is jesus portrayed as an aryan looking man, when all evidence points to him looking more Arabic or Middle Eastern?

I remember three years ago, The Daily Telegraph published a picture of Christ based on the builds of those in Judea back in his times. They only published his face and it did lean towards him being of an Arab build. His hair was much shorter and not as straight.

I believe it is reasonable to infer from scripture that Jesus returned in 70 AD.

Discuss :)

list of questions to consider:
Can only christians make it to heaven?
Was the world really created in 7 days?
Do you need to be baptised to be a christian?
Is the church of today hopelessly captured in 'worldliness'?
Is smoking a sin?
Is swearing a sin?
Is masturbation a sin?
Is the pope God's representative on earth?
Are any of the faith healings/tongue speakings happening today genuine?
Did Jesus really die on a cross?
Is the Bible really the inspired word of God captured without significant change from the original?

Yeah, ok that is far to much to ask, but I was a cult member for 10 years and they are all questions up for reconsideration in my mind.

Dale, I have come across a fair few interesting ideas in my time, but not Jesus returning in 70 AD. Is that something to do with the temples destruction by the Romans?

list of questions to consider:
Can only christians make it to heaven?
Was the world really created in 7 days?
Do you need to be baptised to be a christian?
Is the church of today hopelessly captured in 'worldliness'?
Is smoking a sin?
Is swearing a sin?
Is masturbation a sin?
Is the pope God's representative on earth?
Are any of the faith healings/tongue speakings happening today genuine?
Did Jesus really die on a cross?
Is the Bible really the inspired word of God captured without significant change from the original?

Yeah, ok that is far to much to ask, but I was a cult member for 10 years and they are all questions up for reconsideration in my mind.

Dale, I have come across a fair few interesting ideas in my time, but not Jesus returning in 70 AD. Is that something to do with the temples destruction by the Romans?
ill try to answe as many as i can.:)

according to the bible, only christians can goto heaven. i think thats a load of shit

the world wasnt actually completed in 7 days. thats just a metaphor i was told.

dont't know

don't know

yes smoking is considered a sin as you are doing intentional harm to your body

swearing is considered a sin too, i forgot the reason

masturbation is considered a mortal (really bad) sin. if true im going to hell!:D

don't know

apparently they are

yes jesus really did die on the cross.

don't know

Accidental post.

list of questions to consider:
Can only christians make it to heaven?
-That depends who's telling the story

Was the world really created in 7 days?
-Maybe, but as far as I'm concerned, we, the human race have yet to wrap our heads around the concept of time. Look around you and you will see a mountain of evidence suggesting we've been evolving for millions of years. Take a look at current models of planet formation. Flip-side...
Can massive changes that scientists believe require millions of years happen over night? Yup. Just look at Mount St Helens.

Do you need to be baptised to be a christian?
-No.

Is the church of today hopelessly captured in 'worldliness'?
-Good Question

Is swearing a sin?
-For Christ's sake, it's only if you use the name of our lord in vain.

Is smoking a sin?
Is masturbation a sin?
-Wankings a Sin and Smokings a Wank.

Is the pope God's representative on earth?
-Only if your Catholic. To every other Christian he's nothing more than a tourist attraction in Rome.

Are any of the faith healings/tongue speakings happening today genuine?
-Alot of it is mind over matter, but I have friends who have genuinely whitnessed this stuff. It does happen, believe it or not.

Did Jesus really die on a cross?
-Yup.

Is the Bible really the inspired word of God captured without significant change from the original?
-As far as I'm concerned, it's a book written by a bunch of blokes who thought the world was flat. Even the most devout Christian ought to accept that what's in that text (and various modified versions over the years) can hardly be considered "The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth".

I bet this thread turns to shit, but anyway, I was your typical Christian for a quarter of a century (you know, go to church every now and then, prefer to spend Sunday at the beach or whatever) but in recent years I've been increasingly turned off it by what I consider to be the narrow minded, hardcore conservative views of alot of "Sunday at Church" Christians I know.
Christians need to stop acting like it's the dark ages and embrace many of the findings of science.
I'm sick of people scoffing at scientific claims without giving them the slightest bit of thoughtful consideration.

The church needs to evolve. Why the resistance? The church as an institution has come a long way since Gallileo, so why pretend nothings changed?

For me, religion is an issue of faith. Believing in the possibility of a higher power (whatever it may be).

I know that makes me sound like I've been reading too much Carl Sagan but why not live with an open mind?

I feel better for it. Now I'm not kidding myself.

Mr MacPhisto,

Was the world created in 7 days? I think you are correct in saying no. The Bible is full of many metaphors which unfortunately some people take literally.

As an scientist, the evidence clearly shows the the earth has evolved over billions of years.

Can massive changes that scientists believe require millions of years happen over night? Yup. Just look at Mount St Helens.

Of course such events can occur in a instant, but the forces building up to create such an eruption can take thousands of years.

I believe that evolution and creation can co-exist . Many Christians believe that by embracing evolution, we are suggesting that god or a high power played no part in the creation of the universe. I am of the belief that some higher power was involved in the creation of the building blocks of the universe (i.e. all the laws of physics, creation of the basic forms of life, ) and that through evolution, the world has evolved to its current position.
The bible and the story of the world being created in 7 days (in the book of Genesis) is merely a summary of the major steps of evolution and earth creation, which were made possible my this higher power.

Mr MacPhisto,

Was the world created in 7 days? I think you are correct in saying no. The Bible is full of many metaphors which unfortunately some people take literally.

As an scientist, the evidence clearly shows the the earth has evolved over billions of years.



Of course such events can occur in a instant, but the forces building up to create such an eruption can take thousands of years.

I believe that evolution and creation can co-exist . Many Christians believe that by embracing evolution, we are suggesting that god or a high power played no part in the creation of the universe. I am of the belief that some higher power was involved in the creation of the building blocks of the universe (i.e. all the laws of physics, creation of the basic forms of life, ) and that through evolution, the world has evolved to its current position.
The bible and the story of the world being created in 7 days (in the book of Genesis) is merely a summary of the major steps of evolution and earth creation, which were made possible my this higher power.
Your right, I should have used the word methaphore (though to be honest, christianity is full of methaphores and paradoxes).
My reference to Mount St Helens refers to signs that used to be up at Yellowstone National Park. In a nutshell, it was believed that the "position" of certain fossilised trees was the result of millions of years of weathering. After St Helens blew it's stack, drastically changing the landscape, scientists and geologists discovered that a volcanic blast had been responsible for the unusual position of the trees.
Needless to say the park had to change it's informative signs.

It's nothing more than proof that we still have so much to learn. An intelligent species so young, on a planet so old.

The world was not created in 7 days. The world was created in days according to God. God is infininate, time does not affect God. 1 day for God may be billions of Earth years.

list of questions to consider:
1. Can only christians make it to heaven?
2. Was the world really created in 7 days?
3. Do you need to be baptised to be a christian?
4. Is the church of today hopelessly captured in 'worldliness'?
5. Is smoking a sin?
6. Is swearing a sin?
7. Is masturbation a sin?
8. Is the pope God's representative on earth?
9. Are any of the faith healings/tongue speakings happening today genuine?
10. Did Jesus really die on a cross?
11. Is the Bible really the inspired word of God captured without significant change from the original?

Yeah, ok that is far to much to ask, but I was a cult member for 10 years and they are all questions up for reconsideration in my mind.

Dale, I have come across a fair few interesting ideas in my time, but not Jesus returning in 70 AD. Is that something to do with the temples destruction by the Romans?


Geez. Ya have heaps of questions. I'll be answering these according to Latin Rite Roman Catechism.

1. This is a really tricky question. According to Catholicism, for every religion believing in God(s) believe in same God as us. God is infinite, there is no boundry for God. Pope John II said to Aborigines in Alice Springs, that they believe in same God as us.
2. I've answered it above. God's time is infinate. Steve Hawkinds said God existed before the big bang because God is outside of space time. Remember that time existed when big bang arrived. Hence God is not effected by time. God's interpretation of 1 day could be billion years coz God is immortal.
3. yes, you need to be baptised to be part of Christian. According to Catechism, baptism is a promise to God being part of Catholic community. Its the entrance of new covenant between the baptised and God.
4. Christian religions remarkably still have strong say in politics but not to the extent like Renaissance era. Check out St Vincent De Paul, Salvation Army (which is a religion in its own right), Anglicare. These are social organisations helping the needy. I'll give ya an example. Just before the 2000 Olympics, Carr gov't tried to transport all the homeless from city bounds. This happened in Atlanta games where they must be moved outside of town or else face arrest. Anyways, due to mass lobbying from these organisation, they were not moved and stayed as they were.
5. Smoking a sin? Where did ya get this from? If ya want thorough answer, anything that harms ya body permanantly is not enouraged. Hey, I know that priests smoke.
6. Swearing a sin? Yes it is. Forgot about where in bible it raises this.
7. Dunno.
8. Yes he is. The first pontiff is Peter who recieved God's blessing that he'll follow the church.
9. Glossolalia? Which is speaking in toungles where people cannot understand. They believe its the gift of the holy spirit. I don't believe in it but cannot answer it for you if this pentacostal church really genuine. Let's call it 'singing and clapping' movement. Modern way or praising but fundalmental in worship.
10. Yes.
11. Synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) are pretty genuine. John came at later stages with his own interpretation. yes, they're pretty genuine.

Temples destroyed by Romans? Ya talking about Judaism mate. The Western Wall. Destroyed by the Barbarians. Judaism believes if the temple is rebuilt, the Messiah will come to Earth.

Hope that helped ya, mate!

I can answer Q.7 because of a book someone gave to me called 'Christian Sexuality'...they were afraid for me or something...

Anyway, because the bible doesn't actually mention masturbation it could be assumed that there is nothing wrong with it. However, it is classed as an 'unclean habit' along with fornication, and the bible mentions that you will "benefit yourself" by avoiding such unclean habits (Isaiah 48:17). The main issue, from what i can tell, is that by jerking off a person is undoubtably filling there mind with smut (and that turns your perky little consciousness away from thinking about god)

@Maxivolta, if you can only become a christian through baptism, but you can get into heaven regardless of your religion, why bother to get baptised? It seems rather nice that Catholics believe anyone can get into heaven. I'm sure If I started a religion I'd make it quite elite...you know, special hats and everyone else burns when the end comes kind of thing.

Worship through convenience is the thing I really hate about New Age 'religions'. Mormonism is so far from Christianity. God want us to be unifited under one church but not condemn other religions especially semetic religions.

Breaking up from church or establishing worship through convenience is simply breaking covenant with God.

BTW: What you described as setting up a 'religion' is not a religion but rather a cult. religion is based on tradition where doctrine doesn't change.

jellyman -

Yes, I believe the destruction of the temple is part of a phenomenon which is at the very heart of Biblical prophecy. Please read Matthew 16:27,28 to determine when Jesus said he was going to return.

Set aside what you've been taught and what you've taken for granted. When did Jesus say he'd return ? :)

easiest interpretation = before all listening died. Equals contradiction, means Bible is not inerrant inspired word of God.

Or he came in a hidden sense. And we are rewarded for what we have done in this life, not the afterlife.

Or 27 refers to 'the second coming' and 28 refers to the transfiguration, which is described in the very next verses, chapters 17:1 etc.

@Maxivolta
Cult has such negative connotations and I don't think I'm charismatic enough to start a cult. Your definition of religion is a very specific one not agreed by all. I would think that religions would include cults....consider Jedi (the whole census thing). They not that old, so tradition is pretty much out, and I'm sure that there will be changes in policy as the next movie comes out.

But I guess what's in a name....

Maybe you could further explain worship through convinience?

Worship through convenience is based on greed. Greed is a sin. It is based on non-conformity questioning the utter existance of religion. So it is simply just against religion hence covenant with God and establishing a new institution.

list of questions to consider:
1. Can only christians make it to heaven?
2. Was the world really created in 7 days?
3. Do you need to be baptised to be a christian?
4. Is the church of today hopelessly captured in 'worldliness'?
5. Is smoking a sin?
6. Is swearing a sin?
7. Is masturbation a sin?
8. Is the pope God's representative on earth?
9. Are any of the faith healings/tongue speakings happening today genuine?
10.Did Jesus really die on a cross?
11.Is the Bible really the inspired word of God captured without significant change from the original?



1. God's Salvation is available to all. If you accept Christ as your saviour and in your life, you will go to heaven.

2. The Scripture says yes but some believe that the account is more scientific as it seems on paper and even have mounted evidence that the Bible was right. The account does seems fairly chronological in comparison with the Scientific view. The earth was "formless and desolate" at the start. "Let there be light" and the formation of day and night can be made in reference to the formation of the atmosphere on day 1, the formation of land on day 2 can be made in reference to the volanic eruptions and the appearance of land. he eventual appearance of animals on days 4 and 5 (starting with fish and birds). In Scientific Terms Man is one of the most recent additions on Earth and they appear on the sixth day.

3.Baptism - Generally many Christian Churches as to welcome in or initate new members. The Catholic Church views as part as a rite of initation in Christianity. Through baptism, the individual will receive salvation. In the eye of the Catholic Church your not a full Christian until you have received the first Eucharist and Confirmation. Non Catholic Baptisms are considered invalid because there "is no union with the mystical body"

I'm also aware that In the Baptist Church, you must accept Christ as your saviour before you can be baptised and can be a member of the church.

I've been to a Christian Assembly service where there was no baptism but a decidation or naming ceremony which is like the secular services done today but in a religious format.

The bible suggests that a believer be fully immersed as suggested in Jn 3:23 but also the baptism of Christ himself in the River Jordan.

I cannot say anything about smoking or masturbation being a sin, but in a personal view swearing is a sin as it is an unkind act towards God. Shouting "Jesus" or "God" in anger or inappropriate use is actually swearing and in breach of one of the ten commandments "Do not use the Lord's name in Vain"

8. Matixvolta was right but I'll add on to what was said. Many popes claim that they are Christ's representative on Earth, "High Priest" etc. It is believed that Peter was instructed by Jesus in Matthew Chapter 16 that he was to be the leader of the Church on Earth.

9. Yes as Matixvolta stated, the speaking in tongues is part of the Pentecostal Movement, which is on the rise here in Australia. It's even pulling away those from the mainstream churches. I'm not sure about the faith healing and whether this is geniune.

10. Yes, it's mentioned in the Gospels (New Testment of the Bible)

11. According to Chapter 3 of the Vatican II Document Dei Verbum (Latin for Word of God), the bible has been written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and only contains what God wants us to know for the sake of our salvation

I cannot answer question 4 for you.

i pray a bit, i read the bible when i can, that's all i got to say, and if someone tells me i'm causing trouble by doing that, than they are a :weirdo:

easiest interpretation = before all listening died. Equals contradiction, means Bible is not inerrant inspired word of God.

Or he came in a hidden sense. And we are rewarded for what we have done in this life, not the afterlife.

Or 27 refers to 'the second coming' and 28 refers to the transfiguration, which is described in the very next verses, chapters 17:1 etc.

I believe that the Bible is true *with respect to the truth it means to convey*. Therefore, no need to read the passage as a contradiction. He did return within the lifetime of some present. He told the truth. "Coming" translates from the Greek:PAROUSIA, meaning 'presence". Jesus made his presence felt in the visage of the Roman horde which vanquished Jerusalem less than a generation after Jesus. Please read Luke 21:20ff in this regard.

Remember that God generally acted through human agency to produce intended results. Noteworthy in this regard is the way in which he used Israel's enemies as a chastening rod.

Remember too that the ancient Jews were very confortable using apocolyptic language to describe historical events. Another way of putting this is to say that they vested space-time events with cosmic significance.

Finally, bear in mind that the focus of prophecy is not the end of the world, but rather the end of the *age*, or Old to New Covenant. In other words, the story's played out within a generation of Jesus. And now, presumably, now we can really lay claim to promises we take for granted. As an example, if "heaven and earth" has not "passed away", then we are still bound by the law of Moses !

Think on it :)

Agnostic with respect to the age of the earth.

A rather hard agnostic with respect to evolution.

A true believer with respect to metaphorical language in the Bible.

Mr. Mac -

I hear you on closemindedness in the church. That said, do consider that the church's real error in the time of Galileo was to hitch its wagon to the going theory - the geocentric solar system. So ironically, whereas Galileo is usually trotted out to warn the church against Young Earth Creationism, Galileo is equally a warning against Theistic Evolution, at least in my view.

But then I've also declared myself an agnostic on the age of the universe, and even on the proper understanding of the Biblical Cration Narrative. Indeed, i would go so far as to say we never know in this plane of existence. :)

I have abandoned organized religion - it basically taught me to hate myself for who I am. I have been in many different churches trying to find the right path including:
Seventh Day Adventist
Uniting
Baptist
AOG
Christian Outreach Center
I even tried a Gay Catholic Church in South Brisbane!

None of them gave me the same satisfaction and closeness to God that I recieve from nature and the one on one communion I have with the creator when I am alone on my numerous walks.

God would not want me to hate myself - he created me to be me for some reason that I don't know about, I just have to trust in god (or the higher power)

The rules I live by are simple:

Treat Other People as I would want to be treated.
I shal not ignore the gifts he has given me and my tallents (which is why I am at uni).
Keep an open mind and do my best to just be myself - and to love myself because if I don't like who I am I will find it hard to accept others.

Basically I know I am gay, have been all my life. I am this way for a reason and it is not up to me to question the creators purpose for making me this way. I bring happyness and love to people by just being me.

It is a very big universe out there so who is to say that one organized religion on our little planet is right.

That is my two cents.

jt

In answer to question 2, was the world created in 7 days:

Well I think Genesis actually said 6 days, the 7th being a day of rest. But, the way I see Genesis 1 is based a lot on the first verse. BTW, verses were put in after and are completely discriminate in where a verse starts and ends. Anyway Gen 1.1 goes like, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth".

My look on it is this. First, it is assuming God exists. Genesis does not seek to prove or argue for the existence of a God. It does not explain HOW things were created, what mechanism or physical forces were employed. Genesis to me is a metaphore to explain WHY things were created. With that in mind, Genesis makes a lot more sense to me.

Science shows to me that the Universe is very old, some 13 billion years old. Genesis assume a theistic type God which is a God that is interactive with it's creation but also capable of being outside of it's creation in that it (God) can exist without the creation or Universe we are familiar with. Of course, this is all highly philosophical and I have absolutely no proof for what I am saying. Hehe. I guess that is where faith (not of the blind type) comes into it. It's wise to test one's faith with the physical evidence and proofs presented by science (the HOW of it all) so that one is on guard that the faith they have is not leading them astray. I guess that's a test of personal integrity?

interesting to read everyone's thoughts. I used to have a rather 'logical' view of faith. Everything could be reasoned out. Mainly based on careful logical arguments based on the scripture, kind of like a set of mathematical theorems. Hassle is for every clever argument for or against many of the above questions, there seems to be an even cleverer counter argument. Many people seem to rely on relatively simple arguments one way or the other that do not adress many potential problems and counterarguments.

I've been leaning towards a more experiential and intuitive idea on religion. But if my experience and intuition of God is different from yours, how can I possibly know who is right? Do we just find out when one gets zapped and the other doesn't. Or do we find out it doesn't matter and that there are many different roads to God.

I suppose a lot of it depends first on whether you believe the Bible is God's perfect inspired word, man's version of God's message containing truth in part, or just a myth.

In the red corner. Bible manuscripts have been found dating to less than 100 years for new testament, and about 400 years for old testament. Large volumes of manuscripts have been found, suggesting that if the Bible changed at all, it was rather close to the original events described. Much history is contained in the old testament, and archaelogical evidence has never contradicted this.

In the blue corner Genesis talks about men living for 1000 years. A flood that wiped out the whole earth. A mythical sounding creation story in the first chapter. Another creation story in the second chapter which is not easy to align with the first story.

In the red corner, the book Daniel. Some detailed prophecies which describe the history between 600BC and 0 BC with some remarkable detail. So much so that critics claim it could only be written after the fact. No attempt to claim that it is vague prophecy that just happened to have an interpretation that fit the facts.

But was it really written around 800BC? Our earliest copies of the manusript date to around the time of Christ. Linguistic analysis suggests that if it was a forgery the forger went to great efforts to fit the language style with that of several hundred years earlier. And the jewish scholars who were known to be relatively hard nosed about this type of thing had accepted it as authentic. Kind of equivelant of someone writing a prophecy today in king james english describing the rise and fall of the European empires through to today and succesfully convincing the wider christian audience that it is genuine. Assuming that they can get around some of the improved scientific tools for dating etc that we have today.

Or maybe I should just read the Bible, and decide that the teachings make so much sense to me, and 'speak to me' in such a way that I choose to accept them as inspired. Or maybe there is just no hope for me because I have been taught this from age 5 and so indoctrinated that there is just no way my brain could wrap itself around an alternative view point and still retain my sanity.

Its all so heavy ain't it.

In the red corner, the book Daniel. Some detailed prophecies which describe the history between 600BC and 0 BC with some remarkable detail. So much so that critics claim it could only be written after the fact. No attempt to claim that it is vague prophecy that just happened to have an interpretation that fit the facts.


The amazing fact about Bible prophecy is that it is the only source of prophecy that is 100 % accurate. Many prohecies mentioned in the old testament have been fufiled ie Birth, Death and resurrection of Christ.

Even though the prophecies relating to Christ's return haven't been fufilled, it is bound to happen at some point in the future. I cannot give a date and it is said with the New Testament it can happen at any time and you must be prepared for when it happens but I can say that many of the things occuring in our world will eventually lead to the prophecies being fufilled ie construction of the third temple in Jerusalem (It's in the "planning" stage at present) and the move to the New World Order through the United Nations and the Worlds leaders. You can even say the demise of America or "New Babylon" since September 11 as interpreted in the scripture is one of them.

don't get too excited about the end of the world. I was convinced the world was going to end by at latest 1987 when I was a little kid. It was all stuff to do with Russia v America. And the UN or the EU or something having ten members (the great beast with ten horns). Russia was going to be the king of the north. The barcode has 3 sets of 6 digits. The bankcard logo looks is 3 B's superimposed which is really 3 6's. And the JW's had a big thing about the return of Christ in 1914. And half a dozen other predicted occasions as well. The seventh day adventists started over a big movement prophecying the end of the world in 1852. And 1000 was a time of pretty big end of the world expectations as well, and I bet I haven't even scratched the surface....

I remember about 1991 people thought the world was going to end. That twerp Monte from the today show did some fluff piece on it. Was that a christian thing?

Also has anyone heard of the new hillsong church? Peter Costello was at their concert in the front row. It's very american. Apparently unlike the catholic or anglican church, they don't have issues with asylum seeker detention and the welfare system in this country. They apparently believe that faith will be rewarded in material things, aswell as after life benefits.

What is the opinion of christians here about people who believe that faith cures illness, and that illness can be attributed to a lacking in the the strength of one's faith?

The Bible does not address the end of the world.

The Bible does not address the end of the world.

The world won't end ie blow up for all time and the bible has never said that. I think it is better to say it that the world as we know it now will come to an end through the return of Christ as prophesied in the bible.

fandingo, I have a friend who sometimes attends Hillsong services. He enjoys them. He says there is scripture, sermons, prayer and singing. There was a Hillsong conference at the Sydney Superdome last week, attended by 21 000 people. They sell a wide range of merchandise including music which have raked in millions for their church. Their albums containing music from their services are quite popular in the Christian Music charts. Their latest album, containing music from a service at the Sydney Entertainment Centre back in March is no 1 on the ARIA album charts this week, the first religious album to top a mainstream charts here in OZ. I've listened to a sample and it's very good.

The Bible speaks of the end of the *age*, which I am arguing happened a long time ago when Christ returned. :)

What is the opinion of christians here about people who believe that faith cures illness, and that illness can be attributed to a lacking in the the strength of one's faith?

I'm sure we have a wide variety of opinions. I used to believe this very strongly, even to the point of attempting to win gold lotto by having enough faith. Now I believe that God can heal people when we pray, but that having enough faith is a magic wand which guarantees success, and lack of faith does not guarantee failure. A positive attitude is scientifically proven to be good for health, whether it be faith healing, crystal power, or placebo medicine. And if God wants to intervene then thats his perogative as well.

I am fairly strongly suspicious of claims of faith healing and put a lot of it down to postive attitude, wishfull thinking, coincidence and in some cases outright deceit. But I still try and stay open to the possibility that something genuine may be out there.

Does your city have an area specifically known as a 'bible belt'?

In Sydney I know the Hills district in the north has this reputation.

Brisbane's bible belt is in an arch that runs from Upper Mt Gravatt through to Mansfield. There are alot of big churches and educational facilities in this area.

jt

That twerp Monte from the today show did some fluff piece on it.

hey, Monte Dwyer was a much better character on the Today Show than the blonde bimbo Sammy Lucas is

Who thinks that some modern churches are pushing the prosperity thing. The doctrine of giving money to get more back basically. I find the doctrine, personally, offensive. It's almost like running a church as if it were a business and nothing more.

I saw on the news that Hillsong (which is one of those sunday morning chruch TV things on ch 10) had the top selling album in the aria charts LW.

on the whole what is a sin topic, in the old testament the ten comandments set out a very strict set of rules for living whereas when Christ came around he said forget that shit, I've got 2 rules which replace all of that - love thy neighbour and treat others with kindness and respect (eg: how you'd like to be treated). JayT I feel sorry that churches have made it difficult to reconcile homosexuality (not a sin according to Jesus) with faith, this is because for whatever reason churches tended to move in step with the social order of the day until sometime around the 1300's, it's a pity that many churches still lay down the 10 commandments as absolute when Jesus himself declared them obsolete almost 2000 years ago! I agree you will more god out of the beauty of nature or the inexplicable smile on your child's face than you will out of a church, where you only get guilt.

Yes, but I guarantee you Christ would have been called a homophobe if he were with us today.

Christ said that he did not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it. And that whosoever disobeyed the least of the commandments and taught others to do so would be the least in the kingdom of God.

Many christians claim that the old testament teachings are null and void because Jesus abolished the temple worship (sacrifices etc). While difficult to understand and fully reconcile both of the above, I believe that Jesus fulfulls many of the old testament requirements for us. For instance we are no longer required to make a sacrifice because Christ was our sacrifice.

And Christ's two rules were love the Lord your God with all of your heart soul and mind, and secondly to love your neighbour as yourself.

On homosexuality, I don't think Christ condemned it, but Paul (apostle) writing Romans did. My personal view is that homosexuality is a sin like lying or stealing, and should be treated similar. We can understand mercy and acceptance on people who lie or steal (eg a pen from the office), so why not on homosexuals. I'm not a big fan of picking a few sins that minorities commit, and looking down on them because we commit a different set of sins that are socially (within religious circles) more acceptable.

On homosexuality, I don't think Christ condemned it, but Paul (apostle) writing Romans did. My personal view is that homosexuality is a sin like lying or stealing, and should be treated similar. We can understand mercy and acceptance on people who lie or steal (eg a pen from the office), so why not on homosexuals. I'm not a big fan of picking a few sins that minorities commit, and looking down on them because we commit a different set of sins that are socially (within religious circles) more acceptable.

Leviticus 18:22 states

"No man is to have sexual relations with another man; God hates that."

It is bought up in Romans but the passage says it results from the evil and sinful behaviour of people who fail to accept the true knowledge of God.

I can only assume from the passages is that God doesn't endorse such behaviour. I also agree that being gay is a sin. Like stealing or lying, your turning away from God and his teachings and yes if people do bad things we tend to forget it, and go on with our lives. I for one respect and display tolerance towards gays because I think it's my moral duty as a Christian to show respect for those around me, regardless of any qualities that makes them different.

However, I'am not impressed by the discriminatory behaviour that Catholic Cardinal George Pell has displayed towards gays in church activites ie no communion. It then goes back to what has been pointed out about the theives being forgiven etc. They can still take part in communion while gays are excluded. If they are going to exclude gays, why not exclude theives or those who have committed any type of sin.

I wish scripture was more clearer on this issue, but interpreting what is in the bible and what arises within it is not an easy process. We have to interpret it as best as we can and search for the answers ourselves.

Yes, but I guarantee you Christ would have been called a homophobe if he were with us today.

I don't know, touring the middle east with a band of men, washing each others feet, only female company is a prostitute who doesn't put out! I'll stop now before C closes the thread.

NEway think about it, all the hetero guys on this thread, when you see a woman naked, it's not like you have to think about it you get an instant reaction, it's almost ingrained, when I was a kid I never had a sister, so I didn't know a vagina from a bar of soap but as soon as I hit puberty and saw one I knew, it was instinctive, I imagine from what I've heard that it can be the same for gay people which leads me to think it's something programmed, not learned.

I hope you all realised, I just worked the word Vagina into ytour Christian thread!

:eek:

I don't know, touring the middle east with a band of men, washing each others feet, only female company is a prostitute who doesn't put out! I'll stop now before C closes the thread.

NEway think about it, all the hetero guys on this thread, when you see a woman naked, it's not like you have to think about it you get an instant reaction, it's almost ingrained, when I was a kid I never had a sister, so I didn't know a vagina from a bar of soap but as soon as I hit puberty and saw one I knew, it was instinctive, I imagine from what I've heard that it can be the same for gay people which leads me to think it's something programmed, not learned.

Yes, yes, we knew you were keen to work in "vagina" on the Christian thread ... just because you could. :)

That said, Jesus manifestly upheld the Law of Moses, and you know what Moses had to say about ...

Here is a thread started by cityboi which discusses the issue of the US being the "Mystery Babylon" which is often mentioned in bible prophecy.

http://skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=118928

I had no idea my thread had been resurrected! (I can hardly call it mine cos I started it; it belongs to the forum.)
:) I'll be back for a closer look soon...

Blue

im sorry to say but as long as a western country is the sole super power, Jesus will be portrayed white.
:)

im sorry to say but as long as a western country is the sole super power, Jesus will be portrayed white.
:)

Well, I don't mind a darker-skinned Jesus as long as he can retain a little highlighting in his hairdo.

My girlfriend and I attend the United Church of God, formally the Worldwide Church of God and our answers are pretty much reflective of the belief system to be found there. See www.ucg.org.au

1.Can only christians make it to heaven?

The Bible states emphatically that upon repentance of sin and acceptance of the death of Christ, who was man and God, who willingly came down here to give himself so that many could follow Him to divinity at a later date, an individual then lives with Christ inside of him/her and is dead to the penalty of sin, even though still entirely capable of sinning. This does not mean that penalties do not apply in the event of sin, only simply that there is a way open to avoid the wages of sin, which is death. In short then: repentance, admission of Christ as saviour, baptism is presented as the means by which one has access to eternal life, and there is no other means that are presented by which that can be obtained. I don't think its reasonable (as exclusivist as it sounds) to imagine that the text allows for the possibility of 'many different paths to the light'. The Bible simply doesn't say that.

2.Was the world really created in 7 days?

Uncertain. Does it really matter? It's possible either way. I think its enough to say that creation occured over a certain span of time which God describes as seven days, and seeing as 'a thousand years are as a day and a day as a thousand years' to God it's sorta irrelevant to enter into how long that actually is, unless you're setting out to disprove the text using modern science. You can't disprove something that as been phrased by the author as deliberately vague as this, but if you were to try you will find a silently growing groundswell of scientists (astronomers, microbiologists, even the odd geologist) who admit they see the hand of something higher in their studies.
This is the sort of thing that inevitably stirs up strife and Bible teaches us to avoid that.

3.Do you need to be baptised to be a christian?

Yup. I answered that in Question 1 and the best account of it can be found at the beginning of Acts. Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit at the time, tells the gathered crowd exactly what has to happen once they have realised it was their sin that slayed the Saviour.

4.Is the church of today hopelessly captured in 'worldliness'?

Absolutely. Modern Christianity is increasingly overrun (highly opinionated material, this) by liberals who want us to believe 'it doesn't matter who we believe in, it doesn't matter what you do, grace overcomes everything so do what you want; what we want is what God wants (thankyou very much George W. Bush), we all believe in a higher power, it's all good. Look at blatantly unbiblical characters like Bishop Spong. If you answer this question in the affirmative i would take it one step further and lay the blame at the feet of these types of so called Christians. They are not. Jesus wasn't affraid to tell the Pharisees exactly what He thought of them, and if we are following His example than neither should we.

5.Is smoking a sin?

Not explicitly mentioned of course, but doing anything that goes against the natural use of the human body, which God designed to be a temple of the Holy Spirit goes against God's will. The Bible says that 'anything that is not of Faith is sin', in other words anything that does not fulfill the intent of the Holy Spirit by concious decision is sinful. Ditto with masturbation.

6.Is swearing a sin?

Proverbs and parts of the NT condemn people who are of a profane tongue. However, swearing with the name of God (blasphemy) appears to be in a league of its own, along with the other nine commandments. :)

7.Is masturbation a sin?

There was that character Onan in the OT whom God slew for 'spilling his seed on the ground'. Chances are that when the text only mentions something once in such a negative light, its best to steer clear of it if you can, as well as for what I said in Qu. 5.

8.Is the pope God's representative on earth?

Yikes, I hope not. The articles concerning Baptism in the NT make clear that it is possible for all of us living with Christ within us can therefore become God's representatives, by the examples we set. 'A light on a hill cannot be hidden'. As for a single leader being the only agent by which God's will is being exercised here on Earth...nah.

9.Are any of the faith healings/tongue speakings happening today genuine?

Read James 4:2. Some of them might well be. Some others might also be people who believe so devoutly in what they are doing that they have brought healing about by their own mind power (mind over matter, which says a lot about the power that God created the human mind with). Still others might be brought about by subnatural (as opposed to supernatural) forces seeking to reinforce belief in deceptive belief systems, cults etc. Light will never work darkness, but darkness can imitate light. Even Satan is transformed into an angel of light.

10.Did Jesus really die on a cross?

Probably not. Read through the new testament and you will find (Acts, Hebrews) a number of occaisions where Christ is mentioned 'hung on a tree!'
Not literally hung as in strangled; obviously you need nails for a crucifiction BUT Peter is heard to say '...Him who you slew and hung on a tree.' Go figure. Again, is it really that big a deal?

11.Is the Bible really the inspired word of God captured without significant change from the original?

It sure says as much about itself. You cant use that as proof about itself. What's fascinating and probably unique about the Bible is that it was preserved, unlike most other texts of antiquity, in a remarkable state of preservation and completion, thanks largely to the Jews. Authored by several different authors from vastly different backgrounds over the best part of 1500 years, it nonetheless keeps a remarkable consistency of content and ideas throughout; the fact that God is love, everything He does and everything we see in creation is based on His intent, Love and the laws He's set in place (and no I am not a 'legalist') and most remarkably that He sent His Son to die in our stead so that we can join with Him in eternal life.
Try finding another comparable text that bares those traits and I will also say it is inspired. As for the translations that have appeared in the last hundred years, I think the same cannot be said of them, in that additions are occuring which are doing away with the original intent of the authors for the sake of modern expression. By that, the context becomes skewed and the meanings become literally lost in translation. It works best (worst?) with the writings of Paul, because his concepts are the deepest you will find there.
The entire text bares within its words no proof that it is indeed the work of God to the objective mind; only in its authorship and history can His mark be seen. And Isaiah stated that 'the earth hangs on nothing' long before Isaac Newton discovered as much! Go figure folks. :)

P.S. Jesus didnt look remarkable in a crowd. The text says as much, so He probably looked just like His countrymen. Dark features, slightly swarthy skin, typical middle-eastern appearance is a fair bet.

Bluestar & Sarahjane

Was the world really created in 7 days?


In a theology course I did last semester at Uni, I was taught that the creation story is in fact a myth. It was written during the exile of the Jewish people in Babylon. Genesis or "P" (we don't know the actual identity of the author) based the Judeo-Christian story of creation on that of the Babylonian religion known as "Enuma Nush" which describes the creation of the Gods of Mesopotamia and the creation of the world. Genesis or "P" wrote it in order to maintain the faith of the Jewish people as they were easily being attracted to the Babylonian religion due to their suffering. The message of the creation story was to highlight the greatness of Yahweh and his role as creator. The creation story was presented in a seven day format to highlight the importance of observing the Sabbath (God created the world in six days and rested on the Sabbath).

It would make sense to assume the first few chapters of Genesis are about why there was a creation rather than how "god" did it. Look at it that way and I think it makes a bit more sense. That's my 2 cents worth.

i didnt delete the original thread. ive just "archived" it, because it was ruined by idiot posts.

:ohno:

I remember three years ago, The Daily Telegraph published a picture of Christ based on the builds of those in Judea back in his times. They only published his face and it did lean towards him being of an Arab build. His hair was much shorter and not as straight.

Did he where a brown or blue robe?

Leviticus 18:22 states

"No man is to have sexual relations with another man; God hates that."

It is bought up in Romans but the passage says it results from the evil and sinful behaviour of people who fail to accept the true knowledge of God.

I can only assume from the passages is that God doesn't endorse such behaviour. I also agree that being gay is a sin. Like stealing or lying, your turning away from God and his teachings and yes if people do bad things we tend to forget it, and go on with our lives. I for one respect and display tolerance towards gays because I think it's my moral duty as a Christian to show respect for those around me, regardless of any qualities that makes them different.

However, I'am not impressed by the discriminatory behaviour that Catholic Cardinal George Pell has displayed towards gays in church activites ie no communion. It then goes back to what has been pointed out about the theives being forgiven etc. They can still take part in communion while gays are excluded. If they are going to exclude gays, why not exclude theives or those who have committed any type of sin.

I wish scripture was more clearer on this issue, but interpreting what is in the bible and what arises within it is not an easy process. We have to interpret it as best as we can and search for the answers ourselves.

Do you still think like this? You said these things 8 years ago, mayb you've changed your mind?

Woah this forum harbours some old treasures doesn't it? :nuts:

http://i1.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/000/752/cat.jpg

Woah this forum harbours some old treasures doesn't it? :nuts:

And it also harbours the wickedest necromancer that has ever lived.

I'm trying to be charitable to Fabian, maybe he would like to rethink some of the things he has said, then I can see what I can do about pulling the trolls into line for him...

^^ Haha

Is religion still followed by people? I didn't realise it was still a scene.

Is religion still followed by people? I didn't realise it was still a scene.

Nah, only about five-billion people follow it. It's withering on the vine.

http://i1.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/000/752/cat.jpg

I am utterly disgusted by this image that you have posted























... because whoever created it spelled "surprise" incorrectly.

I'm scared now that in 5 years or so Danubis is going to dig up my Taylor Swift thread.

hehe, i'm scared of the shit that will be thrown in my face when i'm a grown up too.

and wtf is dale?

I am utterly disgusted by this image that you have posted























... because whoever created it spelled "surprise" incorrectly.

was proberly cruise :troll:

hehe, i'm scared of the shit that will be thrown in my face when I give a rim job

Fixed

Do you still think like this? You said these things 8 years ago, mayb you've changed your mind?

No answer, someone is forfeiting a good protector.

was proberly cruise :troll:

proberly is my trademark.

Don't diss it.

No answer, someone is forfeiting a good protector.
??
http://www.totalprosports.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/kane-williamson-ball-to-groin.jpg