| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| If the rapture really happens tomorrow . . .; AKA . . . the Good Bye Thread | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: May 20 2011, 01:21 PM (12,127 Views) | |
| kenny | May 21 2011, 07:43 PM Post #126 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-rapture-20110522,0,5118540.story Partial snip Others had risked a lot more on Camping's prediction, quitting jobs, abandoning relationships, volunteering months of their time to spread the word. Matt Tuter, the longtime producer of Camping's radio and television call-in show, said Saturday that he expected there to be "a lot of angry people" as reality proved Camping wrong. Tuter said Family Radio's AM station in Sacramento had been "severely vandalized" Friday night or Saturday morning, with air conditioning units yanked out and $25,000 worth of copper stripped from the equipment. He thinks it must have been an angry listener. He was off Saturday but planned to drive past the headquarters "and make sure nothing's burning." Camping himself, who has given innumerable interviews in recent months, was staying out of sight Saturday. No one answered the door at his Alameda home, though neighbors said he was there. |
![]() |
|
| Larry | May 21 2011, 08:19 PM Post #127 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
I'm sorry, it is not my intent to make enemies of the catholics here, but you are incorrect. I know that's what the catholic church teaches you, but it is just not the case. Christianity was originally a Jewish religion. Jesus was a Jewish rabbi. His disciples were Jews. The first believers were Jews. When Jesus was crucified, the New Testament church consisted of mostly Jews with a very few gentile believers. They met in homes. They weren't called Christians, but "God Fearers". As the religion grew, it spread into gentile areas. They practiced their faith at the risk of certain death at the hands of the Romans. Thirty seven years after the crucifixion of Jesus, the Roman army under Titus besieged Jerusalem - no one in, no one out. The historian Josephus records that 1.1 million Jews died in this seige. You should read about it. The gentile believers were allowed to leave, the Jews were simply starved to death. It was so bad that some resorted to cannibalism. This was the beginning of the separation of Jews and gentiles among the followers of Jesus Christ, a separation that would never be restored. The separation became final and permanent with the signing of the Edict of Milan, officially recognizing Christianity as the State Religion. Thus, the Church in Rome grew in political power until it ruled most of the known world through Papal States, and the church in Rome, now known as the Roman Catholic Church, was flooded with people from pagan religions who, due to the Roman Church being the state religion, were required to join. The result: the Jewish Christians were left out in the cold, the Roman State Religion came up with what's known as "replacement theology", and proceeded to throw the world into the Dark Ages. So no, neither Peter nor Paul were members of the Roman Catholic Church. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Renauda | May 21 2011, 11:23 PM Post #128 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
They were de facto catholics. Face it Larry, you're fvcked over. |
![]() |
|
| Aqua Letifer | May 21 2011, 11:39 PM Post #129 |
|
ZOOOOOM!
|
|
| I cite irreconcilable differences. | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | May 21 2011, 11:44 PM Post #130 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
No, they were not "de facto" Catholics. I truly do not wish to offend the Catholics here. But the fact of the matter is that the church in Rome spoken of in the Bible is not the Roman Catholic Church. Sorry. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | May 21 2011, 11:49 PM Post #131 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Larry: I am very familiar with Josephus, but your account of first few centuries of Christianity and Judaism makes no sense and does not accord with the historical scriptural accounts or the subsequent historical record. Did you forget that Peter and the other apostles first worshiped in the Temple but were driven from the temple by the Sanhedrin? It's in the book of Acts 4. Or that after Paul's conversion he too was attacked by the Jews (Acts 14) and driven from the synagogue (Acts 17) and the Temple (Acts 21). Your account of Christianity only separating from Judaism after 70 a.d. is not even supported by the Bible accounts. The names we find in the Book of Acts, for instance, or the various salutations in the epistles are often to non-Jewish people (based on their names and other details given in Scripture -- Cornelius, Agabus, Lucius, Lydia, Dionysius, Eutychus, etc) all show early gentile affiliations. And the Council of Jerusalem, which issued instructions to non Jews who became Christian, also contradicts your account. (Acts 15) And what on earth do you make of all the references in Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, and Timothy to the gospel being spread among the Gentiles? That all happened a least a decade before Jerusalem was razed -- Christianity was already long separated from the political and religious meaning of the Temple and the synagogue in the Judaism of that era. We also can be assured that both Peter and Paul went to Rome, and both were martyred there. (Hence my comment about how both were the first "Roman" Catholics -- you must have missed that allusion). It is clear that Peter was in Rome since he sends "Greetings from the Church in Babylon" -- that can only be Rome since in the 1st cent the city of Babylon did not even exist. We have early an 3rd century testimony that both the bodies of Peter and Paul were venerated in Rome -- a record 100 years before Constantine. And NO other location has ever claimed their bodies, whereas the cities that claim the martyr sites of the Apostles are without dispute. It is also a myth that "They practiced their faith at the risk of certain death at the hands of the Romans." -- before Nero there were no Imperial persecutions of Christians, and after Nero there were relative and long periods of peace where Christians were not persecuted. Under Trajan there was basically a DADT policy; and there were a couple of severe persecutions in the mid 3rd cent -- Maximus Thrax and Decius and then Diocletian just before the Peace of Constantine. But for most of the "ante pacem" period -- 33 AD to 313 AD -- Christians were free to worship, owned property, and built buildings that were significant urban structures even though they were an insignificant group among hundreds of religious groups in the Roman Empire. By the beginning of the 3rd cent, they perhaps made up about 1/2% of the population of the Roman empire. A small sect that had no political power. But long before that there is an established "Church" complete with a hierarchy--bishops, priests and deacons-- the primacy of the Bishop of Rome, a eucharistic liturgy which was understood as a sacrificial (the Mass), and the common use of calling the Church "Catholic" -- going back to Ignatius of Antioch in about 109 AD. Also, the Edict of Milan certainly did not make Christianity into the State religion --- it was only an edict of tolerance. Honestly, Larry, I don't know where you get your history, but it is not serious scholarship. I realize that you are writing in good faith and good will, and not looking to make enemies. I also get that you buy into some "Great Apostasy" theory of the Church -- you kind of have to as a Protestant. I don't take any offense at what you write, but much of what you wrote is not supported by the historical record. May I suggest that you read the actual early Church fathers -- I'd suggest "Early Christian Writings: The Apostolic Fathers " by Staniforth. If you want to understand early Christianity, please read The Didache and the letters of Ignatius of Antioch. You will see well formed Catholic ideas that continue to this day. You might also read Eusebius' History of the Church to understand the Church from the time of Jesus to Constantine. There are also a number of excellent non Catholic historians such as Henry Chadwick (The Early Church) or Jaroslav Pelikan (Vol 1 of The Christian Tradition) who give a solid reading of the history. Again, Larry, I take no offense, but if you want to have these sorts of discussions we need to do real scholarship and work with the actual texts that we have from the early Church. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | May 22 2011, 12:06 AM Post #132 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
As it is 4 in the morning, I will pass on responding right now. But I will suggest to you that the information you deem as correct may not be as correct as you think. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | May 22 2011, 12:35 AM Post #133 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Sweet dreams, Larry. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| taiwan_girl | May 22 2011, 11:16 PM Post #134 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
Interesting discussion - I have learned quite a bit from it. Ultimately however, while there are historical texts and writing, every religion (Catholic, Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Taoist) requires a person to have faith to believe that which cannot be proven. For example, there are various temples that have a piece or pieces of Buddha's bone. Are they real? - it is impossible to say, but if you believe, that is all that matters. |
![]() |
|
| kenny | May 23 2011, 12:14 AM Post #135 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
SNIP The man who said the world was going to end appeared at his front door in Alameda a day later, very much alive but not so well. "It has been a really tough weekend," said Harold Camping, the 89-year-old fundamentalist radio preacher who convinced hundreds of his followers that the rapture would occur on Saturday at 6 p.m. Massive earthquakes would strike, he said. Believers would ascend to heaven and the rest would be left to wander a godforsaken planet until Oct. 21, when Camping promised a fiery end to the world. But on Sunday, almost 18 hours after he thought he'd be in heaven, there was Camping, "flabbergasted" in Alameda, wearing tan slacks, a tucked-in polo shirt and a light jacket. Birds chirped. A gentle breeze blew. Across the street, neighbors focused on their yard work and the latest neighborhood gossip. "I'm looking for answers," Camping said, adding that meant frequent prayer and consultations with friends. "But now I have nothing else to say," he said, closing the door to his home. "I'll be back to work Monday and will say more then." Camping's followers will surely be listening. "I'm not as disappointed as everyone since I didn't fully believe him," said one, who asked to remain anonymous Sunday because he worried he would be shunned for admitting he was "upset" with Camping. The middle-aged Oakland resident said he'd been listening to Camping since 1993, when he said the world would end in 1994. That was strike one, the man said. And this is strike two. Even so, he said, that doesn't mean the message is wrong. "I just know he's biblically sound," the man said. "I've never been one of these guys who think everything he says is true. "I don't think I am going to stop listening to him," the man added, heaving a deep sigh before continuing: "I don't know, I gotta listen to him on Monday, see what he says on the radio." Outside Camping's compound near the Oakland airport, which was locked and dark on Sunday, a different religious group waited for dejected believers. "I would encourage them not to lose their faith because they listened to a wolf in sheep's clothing, and Jesus said there would be wolves in sheep's clothing," said Jackie Alnor. Alnor, a resident of Hayward who blogs about the rapture, said Camping had twisted the word of God by trying to predict the end. Only God knows when the world will end, she said. "He's in big trouble with God," she said. If that isn't bad enough, she said, Camping's false prophecy could have bigger impacts on religion. "It's given people who hate Christianity an excuse to hate it even more," she said. "People can just paint with broad brush strokes." Across town, a group of atheists gathered in Oakland's Masonic Center to observe the promised rapture in their own way. "The issue is the Bible is mythology," said Larry Hicok, state director of the American Atheists, bluntly laying out his case. Roughly 200 people attended the hastily scheduled conference to discuss the impact of organized religion on American culture. "Every ruler needs a religion," Hicok said. "Everybody knows that's the way you get power." He said too many followers of religion get lost in the details of their particular belief. "Maybe the constant is love, and the rest of it you can let go of," he said. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/05/22/BAKO1JJIK7.DTL |
![]() |
|
| Larry | May 23 2011, 08:02 AM Post #136 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
I am always amused by the atheist claim that the Bible is "myth". It shows such an abject ignorance of the Bible. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Frank_W | May 23 2011, 08:08 AM Post #137 |
![]()
Resident Misanthrope
|
Why, every time it's something to do with religion and a charismatic leader, they aren't in a house, or on a farm, or at their church? Why is it always a "compound"? That sounds so ominous. He's not at home with his feet up in the La-Z-boy, watching TV. No... "Everything is dark and quiet in his compound." Why mince words? Why don't they just go ahead and call it a "lair"?
|
|
Anatomy Prof: "The human body has about 20 sq. meters of skin." Me: "Man, that's a lot of lampshades!" | |
![]() |
|
| Renauda | May 23 2011, 08:12 AM Post #138 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Well there's a few fables, folklore, poetry and even some ancient tribal history in there as well. |
![]() |
|
| Larry | May 23 2011, 08:22 AM Post #139 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
That is true. But that doesn't make the Bible "myth". The Bible is a compliation of lots of different books covering lots of different subjects written over a nearly 2,000 year span of time. Not everything in the Bible is literal, not everything in the Bible is metaphorical. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| KlavierBauer | May 23 2011, 08:26 AM Post #140 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Frank: People's minds are easier to control when you keep them separates from the outside, and all together all the time. Makes a compound sort of necessary. ![]() Obviously as an Orthodox Christian I have a lot of objections to the historical account I read of Peter and Paul not being Catholic. Of course the Orthodox might argue about points of detail with catholics, but the history that IT has laid out is pretty right on with what is considered accurate as the historical record - not by Christians, but by historians, classicists, etc. I'd say Peter and Paul weren't Catholic, but were Orthodox - but again, that's a semantic argument, as the history of the early Church is pretty well documented. I'm sure IT and I would agree on just about 100% of everything in the Church up to about 1054. ![]() |
|
"I realize you want him to touch you all over and give you babies, but his handling of the PR side really did screw the pooch." - Ivory Thumper "He said sleepily: "Don't worry mom, my dick is like hot logs in the morning." - Apple | |
![]() |
|
| Frank_W | May 23 2011, 08:28 AM Post #141 |
![]()
Resident Misanthrope
|
That isn't what I was saying. Thanks for playing, though.
|
|
Anatomy Prof: "The human body has about 20 sq. meters of skin." Me: "Man, that's a lot of lampshades!" | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | May 23 2011, 08:34 AM Post #142 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
It won't square with those historians who aren't predisposed to the Catholic viewpoint. Perhaps you can tell me where in scripture Paul endorsed infant Baptism, Mary worship, rosary beads, etc. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Frank_W | May 23 2011, 08:49 AM Post #143 |
![]()
Resident Misanthrope
|
Larry, you're a good guy, but you're starting to cross over into being a jerk. |
|
Anatomy Prof: "The human body has about 20 sq. meters of skin." Me: "Man, that's a lot of lampshades!" | |
![]() |
|
| Renauda | May 23 2011, 08:57 AM Post #144 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
One my biggest problems with Christianity in general is the undeserved importance and misplaced authority the orthodox Christian churches put on that Paul guy. The fact is that he never met Christ and appears not have gotten on very well with the apostles who actually bore witness to the man and his teachings. |
![]() |
|
| Larry | May 23 2011, 09:05 AM Post #145 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
Why, because I asked a question? |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | May 23 2011, 09:09 AM Post #146 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
I can understand that. One of my biggest problems with Catholicism is the belief in papal succession, based on Peter being the first "pope", when there is absolutely no evidence to support the claim that Peter was ever in Rome. Paul sure didn't seem to think so - if he did, he must have been miffed at Peter, since he never mentioned him in his letters to Rome, or during the 2 years he lived there.... |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| KlavierBauer | May 23 2011, 09:20 AM Post #147 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
I don't think that's true. Most college classicists and/or historians would largely agree with what is accepted as the early history of the church, specifically the "Early Church Period" from about 0 - 300 AD. Furthermore, I would hardly call any of those "predisposed to the catholic viewpoint." I have a good friend who is a professor at Berkley and teaches this very subject. He's well respected across the country, and is hardly "pro-catholic" or even "pro-christian" in his teaching. As for Paul mentioning infant baptism, "Mary worship" (whatever that is?) and Rosaries I have no idea if he did or not. I doubt he did. So what? I'm Orthodox - we respect and venerate Mary, and also venerate other icons/Saints as do the Catholics, but we don't worship them - that sounds like another confusing idea you have about us. We don't have Rosaries either, but many Orthodox clergy, and lay people use "prayer ropes" which have a very long tradition. They're similar to the Rosary, and I'd imagine that one was the other at some point, or that they at least share a common origin, though I don't know the history. It's a rope of small knots, and one prays a prayer on each knot - typically the "Jesus prayer" (Lord/Jesus have mercy on me a sinner). It's very meditative, and again, is a very long-held practice dating back to very early Christendom - but we've already debated the ideas of meditation in the early Church before, so I won't press that idea. I know many protestants faithfully venerate the icon of the cross in their churches, homes, around their necks, etc. - but never once have I seen mention of it in the Bible. I think both of our traditions have lots of tradition so to speak. Again - so what? |
|
"I realize you want him to touch you all over and give you babies, but his handling of the PR side really did screw the pooch." - Ivory Thumper "He said sleepily: "Don't worry mom, my dick is like hot logs in the morning." - Apple | |
![]() |
|
| Renauda | May 23 2011, 09:42 AM Post #148 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
I think Larry is referring the Roman Catholic dogma of the immaculate conception. Larry is not alone in questioning the legitimacy of it. As you know Orthodoxy does not buy into it either. |
![]() |
|
| KlavierBauer | May 23 2011, 09:48 AM Post #149 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
I'm guessing Larry was referring more to the reverence for Mary as Theotokos, rather than just a lucky chick - but he can inform us better which was his meaning. As for the Immaculate Conception, no - the Orthodox don't use this same term, though the idea originate with the early Fathers (prior to 1054) and as such was part of Christianity prior to the Schism. So - while the Orthodox don't define this as clearly as the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception does, and while many/most Orthodox would say that they do not subscribe to this line of thinking, the idea of Mary as "achrantos" is held within the Orthodox Faith. |
|
"I realize you want him to touch you all over and give you babies, but his handling of the PR side really did screw the pooch." - Ivory Thumper "He said sleepily: "Don't worry mom, my dick is like hot logs in the morning." - Apple | |
![]() |
|
| Renauda | May 23 2011, 09:56 AM Post #150 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
It's an arcane theological topic not far removed from that burning question,"how many angels can dance on the head of a pin". |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |












11:28 AM Jul 11