Greatest Sect of Christianity

[Jon Miller]

Actually, except that I don't think the non-Christian or non-interested part of Apolyton would be interested in it, but I would be intersted in discussing the Trinity. I think it was developed as the best but imperfect understanding. And defined so thoroughly because it caused fights.

Now we do have Christian versions where the traditional trinity doctrine is not accepted (it is accepted in general, now, among Adventists. But in the past it wasnt' generally accepted, and you can still find some who don't beleive in it), and I would be interested on what Orthodox/etc think of it.

JM

[Imran Siddiqui]

The Trinity wasn't fully adopted until 325ish (Nicea). Though it was necessary - I don't people realize how popular Arianism was getting. And there is references of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit - but to consider them of one being was an attempt to explain the divinity of Christ. However, Jews already had a conception of God having many forms (God and Holy Spirit was already conceptualized).

[molly bloom]

Yes the Word is Scripture. The Scripture is eternal. It existed in the beginning in it's complete form. That is exactly what the verse says.

Umm, the Bible was written by fallible human beings. That's why there are two confused and intertwined stories of Genesis (and let's face it, if you can't get the introduction to something straight, then you really should think about starting over) and that's why the gospels don't get history right.

Please don't try to con any of us into thinking the Bible was a single divinely revealed text.

[molly bloom]

LOL at MB, The Gospel isn‘t should social salvation it's about personal salvation. Anyone who doesn't know that is as stupid as a typical tea bagged.

Right.

So by associating with people who were deemed beyond the pale socially, and by telling those obsessed with a rigid orthodoxy and orthopraxy that the religious laws were made for humanity and not humanity for the laws, then nothing socially transformative was being done. You can't ignore how he also says that by believing and foloowing him, you may find yourself at odds even with your own family. Something that modern day cults also work on...

I like the story of Dives and Lazarus, but I also like the poor and hungry not to have to wait before they die not to feel want or hurt.

So did Wiclif. And John Ball.

[molly bloom]

Well, if you ask, "Why do so few converts feel attracted to a movement that's mostly popular in Latin America?" the fact that you've mostly met converts from rich countries outside of LA might offer a clue.

I was using 'liberation theology' as an example. I could have used the Unitarians or Quakers, and in fact it's of interest that Kidicious hasn't started out with either of them as his new ideological entree.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Umm, the Bible was written by fallible human beings. That's why there are two confused and intertwined stories of Genesis (and let's face it, if you can't get the introduction to something straight, then you really should think about starting over) and that's why the gospels don't get history right.

I actually think that is one of the Bible's strengths. It's not some heavily edited sugar coated religious text, but all the oral tradition and written stories put together because they were all seen as divinely inspired (which does not mean they have to be all perfect - inspiration doesn't mean dictation), regardless of any potential contradiction. It didn't matter if they conflicted at some points, they were divinely inspired texts and therefore worthy of being put in the story of God's revelation to humanity.

[molly bloom]

Even the conservatives, like the Pope Benedict XVI seemingly had little against their outreach work, believing that taking care of the poor is important for Christians. They just objected to that seemingly being the only point of being a Christian - that and the idea of preference for the poor.

Um, given the appalling social and political conditions for the poor and indigenous in Central and South America, I think an emphasis on saving them spiritually and physically is more than understandable. A personal spiritual transformation is a nice idea if you have a full belly, shoes, a job, running water, healthcare and the franchise.

Not much use (in my opinion) if you don't own your land, have no access to a doctor and risk an early death from malnutrition or a host of easily treatable diseases. I was quite struck by a passage describing the living conditions of Andean Indians in Ecuador in the mid 20th Centuryand how much it sounded like the same conditions which faced the English peasantry before the outbreak of the Peasants' Revolt of 1381.

So much for progress and capitalism. As for preferring the poor- the Vatican hierarchy had no problems with, for instance, a Papal Nuncio siding with the junta and plotters of the coup against Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala. I've come to expect hypocrisy in great draughts from the Vatican, but it still irks when you see grinning prelates from the faith you were brought up in supping with murderers and committers of genocide.

[Elok]

Actually, except that I don't think the non-Christian or non-interested part of Apolyton would be interested in it, but I would be intersted in discussing the Trinity. I think it was developed as the best but imperfect understanding. And defined so thoroughly because it caused fights.

Now we do have Christian versions where the traditional trinity doctrine is not accepted (it is accepted in general, now, among Adventists. But in the past it wasnt' generally accepted, and you can still find some who don't beleive in it), and I would be interested on what Orthodox/etc think of it.

JM

I really don't know enough about our doctrine of the Trinity to comment in detail, though. I believe our conception has something to do with Christ being the logos or intent of God flowing out along with the pneuma/breath/Spirit. But I could be getting even that wrong.

[loinburger]

During religious eduction I learned about three or four different conceptions/visualizations of the trinity, at least one of which was (I learned later) officially heretical. It's probably the trickiest doctrine and, IMO, one of the least important (the important part is that all three aspects are divine; the unimportant part is whether the three aspects have different personalities, or if one aspect is subservient to another, or if one aspect somehow predates another, etc)

[Elok]

I think the preferred metaphor for the Trinity is to compare it to the sun, with God being the sun and the other two being the light and heat emanating from it. That's mostly used to show how two things can proceed from a third eternally without postdating it. Though technically there was probably a split trillionth of a second after the sun formed when it wasn't emanating light or heat. Or maybe there wasn't. I'd have to ask a physicist.

See, theology is complicated. You have to consult a blacksmith to properly understand the metaphor for theosis.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Um, given the appalling social and political conditions for the poor and indigenous in Central and South America, I think an emphasis on saving them spiritually and physically is more than understandable. A personal spiritual transformation is a nice idea if you have a full belly, shoes, a job, running water, healthcare and the franchise.

Granted, but a spiritual transformation should be, for lack of a better phrase, on the agenda. To simply cast it aside is basically neutering Christianity to just a social program. That, and saying God loves the poor more is a very twisted way of looking at Scripture.

[Kidlicious]

Umm, the Bible was written by fallible human beings. That's why there are two confused and intertwined stories of Genesis (and let's face it, if you can't get the introduction to something straight, then you really should think about starting over) and that's why the gospels don't get history right.

Please don't try to con any of us into thinking the Bible was a single divinely revealed text.

You believe that Jesus was a liberation theologan and you wanna talk about conning people?

[molly bloom]

Granted, but a spiritual transformation should be, for lack of a better phrase, on the agenda. To simply cast it aside is basically neutering Christianity to just a social program. That, and saying God loves the poor more is a very twisted way of looking at Scripture.

But I don't recall seeing any evidence of liberation theologians having chucked out the theological baby with the bathwater. As they lived in countries where for centuries (with very few exceptions) the local Church hierarchy and the Vatican had consistently sided with regimes who had used tactics of genocide against indigenous peoples and ruthless political repression against even 'liberals' (what would be Centrists in Western Europe) I don't think that a little emphasis on the more social aspects of New Testament teaching was uncalled for.

[molly bloom]

You believe that Jesus was a liberation theologan and you wanna talk about conning people?

Well, we could start with your assumption that I believe Jesus was anything other than a radical Jewish rabbi tried for crimes against the Roman state. I can't see anywhere where I've called him a 'liberation theologian'.

Please do quote me, it's much easier than making inaccurate and misleading paraphrases that serve your own agenda.

As for conning people- established churches (the Donation of Constantine) and televangelists (Oral Roberts) have rather more experience in that regard than I do.

[Kidlicious]

I don't know enough of the Church's teaching on the Trinity to expound it with any confidence, but I definitely didn't make it up, it's been around for almost as long as Christianity itself. If anything, the ancient Christian church "made it up."

It's one of those things that developed. Obviously the apostle that wrote the gospel of John believed in it and had an influence.

But the point really is that you're dismissing the obvious intepretation for one that is more preferable to your world view or its just what you were told. You now have the aid of historical context if yiu choose to use it but liberals tend not to.