Support SNAP!!!

[Deleted]

Do your part to drive the evil catholic church and all of its branches off the face of the earth.

Only pagans use "priests."

Pray for the gullible people all over the world who have been lied to and abused in many fashions but this corrupt evil cult.  Help them escape the ignorance that is guaranteeing them eternity in Hell.

www.snapnetwork.org/

[daleko]

Aug 15, 2018 14:50:14 GMT -5 @muttthemaster said:

Only pagans use "priests." 

And your issue is, with this priestess?

[Deleted]

The concept of the consecrated priesthood has always been integral to Christianity-- from the very beginning of the Church in Jerusalem and Antioch.

It was directly derived from ancient Judaism and the Tabernacle/"Holy of Holies" in the Temple at Jerusalem.

Rev. Muttley B. Nutsack really needs to go back and study the Scriptures that he pretends to use as the DIY basis for his 180 year old construct of a "church."

[daleko]

Aug 16, 2018 10:39:43 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

The concept of the consecrated priesthood has always been integral to Christianity-- from the very beginning of the Church in Jerusalem and Antioch.

It was directly derived from ancient Judaism and the Tabernacle/"Holy of Holies" in the Temple at Jerusalem.

Rev. Muttley B. Nutsack really needs to go back and study the Scriptures that he pretends to use as the DIY basis for his 180 year old construct of a "church."

Certainly the name, from presbyter, but the concept, as a mediation agent between humans and one or more deities, consecrated or otherwise, is as old as the grouping of man, certainly not originated by Juda. Many "religions" around the globe beginning in ancient Africa had their own vision of and name for a "priest". It's obviously has been a need for humans and their man made religions since the dawn of groups.

[Deleted]

Aug 16, 2018 13:24:33 GMT -5 daleko said:

Aug 16, 2018 10:39:43 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

The concept of the consecrated priesthood has always been integral to Christianity-- from the very beginning of the Church in Jerusalem and Antioch.

It was directly derived from ancient Judaism and the Tabernacle/"Holy of Holies" in the Temple at Jerusalem.

Rev. Muttley B. Nutsack really needs to go back and study the Scriptures that he pretends to use as the DIY basis for his 180 year old construct of a "church."

Certainly the name, from presbyter, but the concept, as a mediation agent between humans and one or more deities, consecrated or otherwise, is as old as the grouping of man, certainly not originated by Juda. Many "religions" around the globe beginning in ancient Africa had their own vision of and name for a "priest". It's obviously has been a need for humans and their man made religions since the dawn of groups.

       Assuming that you believe in a Deity, how would you determine whether a particular "religion" was entirely "man made" -- as opposed to being established by an authentic Divine revelation/theophany?

       In other words, how do you know that your a priori assumption that all religions are merely "man made" is true?

       Your assumption is a type of anthropolgical reductionism-- i.e., "because all societies have tended to establish religions, all religions must be merely "man-made."

[oujour76]

Aug 16, 2018 13:24:33 GMT -5 daleko said:

Aug 16, 2018 10:39:43 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

The concept of the consecrated priesthood has always been integral to Christianity-- from the very beginning of the Church in Jerusalem and Antioch.

It was directly derived from ancient Judaism and the Tabernacle/"Holy of Holies" in the Temple at Jerusalem.

Rev. Muttley B. Nutsack really needs to go back and study the Scriptures that he pretends to use as the DIY basis for his 180 year old construct of a "church."

Certainly the name, from presbyter, but the concept, as a mediation agent between humans and one or more deities, consecrated or otherwise, is as old as the grouping of man, certainly not originated by Juda. Many "religions" around the globe beginning in ancient Africa had their own vision of and name for a "priest". It's obviously has been a need for humans and their man made religions since the dawn of groups.

Cue the "true church" argument in 3, 2, 1.

[daleko]

Aug 16, 2018 13:47:33 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Aug 16, 2018 13:24:33 GMT -5 daleko said:

Certainly the name, from presbyter, but the concept, as a mediation agent between humans and one or more deities, consecrated or otherwise, is as old as the grouping of man, certainly not originated by Juda. Many "religions" around the globe beginning in ancient Africa had their own vision of and name for a "priest". It's obviously has been a need for humans and their man made religions since the dawn of groups.

       Assuming that you believe in a Deity, how would you determine whether a particular "religion" was entirely "man made" -- as opposed to being established by an authentic Divine revelation/theophany?

       In other words, how do you know that your a priori assumption that all religions are merely "man made" is true?

       Your assumption is a type of anthropolgical reductionism-- i.e., "because all societies have tended to establish religions, all religions must be merely "man-made."

So, using your questions, there is no one true church. A reasonable conclusion if you believe that all of the different religions, all of the different concepts of a deity, are deity made.

Your reasonable question is one that I can't answer, nor can you. You believe what you believe in faith. Now either way how a particular set of beliefs are created and nurtured is a field of study that is beyond the interest of most, who just try to move from day to day and exist. Some become extinct. Some grow. Some remain static. But, within their ranks, they believe, in faith. 

[Deleted]

Aug 16, 2018 0:32:45 GMT -5 daleko said:

Aug 15, 2018 14:50:14 GMT -5 @muttthemaster said:

Only pagans use "priests." 

And your issue is, with this priestess?

Judging by the ears, she is married to Mr. Spock.  I ain't touching HER!

[Deleted]

Aug 16, 2018 14:20:06 GMT -5 daleko said:

Aug 16, 2018 13:47:33 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

       Assuming that you believe in a Deity, how would you determine whether a particular "religion" was entirely "man made" -- as opposed to being established by an authentic Divine revelation/theophany?

       In other words, how do you know that your a priori assumption that all religions are merely "man made" is true?

       Your assumption is a type of anthropolgical reductionism-- i.e., "because all societies have tended to establish religions, all religions must be merely "man-made."

So, using your questions, there is no one true church. A reasonable conclusion if you believe that all of the different religions, all of the different concepts of a deity, are deity made.

Your reasonable question is one that I can't answer, nor can you. You believe what you believe in faith. Now either way how a particular set of beliefs are created and nurtured is a field of study that is beyond the interest of most, who just try to move from day to day and exist. Some become extinct. Some grow. Some remain static. But, within their ranks, they believe, in faith. 

Keeping this to Christianity only, man does not need a "go between" to plea on his behalf to God.

"Father forgive me" is pure bullshit.  Only God and the person you have wronged can forgive you. 

You confess your sins directly to God, or to your fellow believers OPENLY.  You don't need to talk to a crossdressing child molester hiding behind a curtain in a closet.  That is NOT Christianity.

[Deleted]

Aug 16, 2018 14:20:06 GMT -5 daleko said:

Aug 16, 2018 13:47:33 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

       Assuming that you believe in a Deity, how would you determine whether a particular "religion" was entirely "man made" -- as opposed to being established by an authentic Divine revelation/theophany?

       In other words, how do you know that your a priori assumption that all religions are merely "man made" is true?

       Your assumption is a type of anthropolgical reductionism-- i.e., "because all societies have tended to establish religions, all religions must be merely "man-made."

So, using your questions, there is no one true church. A reasonable conclusion if you believe that all of the different religions, all of the different concepts of a deity, are deity made.

Your reasonable question is one that I can't answer, nor can you. You believe what you believe in faith. Now either way how a particular set of beliefs are created and nurtured is a field of study that is beyond the interest of most, who just try to move from day to day and exist. Some become extinct. Some grow. Some remain static. But, within their ranks, they believe, in faith. 

Still struggling with reading comprehension deficits, eh, Cheese Burgher?

I never said that I believe all religions are necessarily based on a Divine theophany.

What I asked is how you presume to know that any particular religion is not.

St. Paul wrote in one of his epistles, "All of the pagan gods are demons" -- a truly fascinating notion, based on what we know about the pagan Greek oracles of antiquity (e.g., at Delphi.)

Secondly, there is more to any intellectually defensible religious belief, IMO, that mere "faith." 

What is the evidence for the "faith?"

Is there empirical evidence of theophany, and truth-criteria of internal consistency?

As an example, from what I have heard, the Book of Mormon describes Native Americans as a lost tribe of Israel.  But there is no historical or anthropological evidence to support such a claim.

[daleko]

Aug 16, 2018 20:07:08 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Still struggling with reading comprehension deficits, eh, Cheese Burgher?

I never said that I believe all religions are necessarily based on a Divine theophany.

What I asked is how you presume to know that any particular religion is not.

<SHRUG> OK. So how many, if any, iyo, are?  All, some, one, none? There are roughly 4,200 religions in the world today. Maybe 20 that have 1,000,000 + followers.  Now add in those not on the list today but were begun since the dawn of tribes. Who knows what that number is. Started as early as 38,000 BCE and progressed from there. Stonehedge and Sumerian in 3,000 BCE . Egypt a bit after, Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh, Minoans around 2200 BCE, Hindu Rig Veda around 1700 BCE, Akhenaten started the oldest mono around 1360 BCE, Tora was written about 600 BCE, also around then Shu Ching, Zoroastrianism also. And on and on.

Not any interest in moving this on, so just give me a number, if you choose to. Either way I'm out.

[Deleted]

Aug 16, 2018 23:41:28 GMT -5 daleko said:

Aug 16, 2018 20:07:08 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Still struggling with reading comprehension deficits, eh, Cheese Burgher?

I never said that I believe all religions are necessarily based on a Divine theophany.

What I asked is how you presume to know that any particular religion is not.

<SHRUG> OK. So how many, if any, iyo, are?  All, some, one, none? There are roughly 4,200 religions in the world today. Maybe 20 that have 1,000,000 + followers.  Now add in those not on the list today but were begun since the dawn of tribes. Who knows what that number is. Started as early as 38,000 BCE and progressed from there. Stonehedge and Sumerian in 3,000 BCE . Egypt a bit after, Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh, Minoans around 2200 BCE, Hindu Rig Veda around 1700 BCE, Akhenaten started the oldest mono around 1360 BCE, Tora was written about 600 BCE, also around then Shu Ching, Zoroastrianism also. And on and on.

Not any interest in moving this on, so just give me a number, if you choose to. Either way I'm out.

Well, to keep it simple, let me quote the ultimate authority to answer your question.

Mathew 8:11

"And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven."

[daleko]

Aug 17, 2018 10:38:32 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Aug 16, 2018 23:41:28 GMT -5 daleko said:

<SHRUG> OK. So how many, if any, iyo, are?  All, some, one, none? There are roughly 4,200 religions in the world today. Maybe 20 that have 1,000,000 + followers.  Now add in those not on the list today but were begun since the dawn of tribes. Who knows what that number is. Started as early as 38,000 BCE and progressed from there. Stonehedge and Sumerian in 3,000 BCE . Egypt a bit after, Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh, Minoans around 2200 BCE, Hindu Rig Veda around 1700 BCE, Akhenaten started the oldest mono around 1360 BCE, Tora was written about 600 BCE, also around then Shu Ching, Zoroastrianism also. And on and on.

Not any interest in moving this on, so just give me a number, if you choose to. Either way I'm out.

Well, to keep it simple, let me quote the ultimate authority to answer your question.

Mathew 8:11

"And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven."

I will always respect what you believe, in faith. What was that number again?

[Deleted]

Aug 17, 2018 14:11:45 GMT -5 daleko said:

Aug 17, 2018 10:38:32 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Well, to keep it simple, let me quote the ultimate authority to answer your question.

Mathew 8:11

"And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven."

I will always respect what you believe, in faith. What was that number again?

The Lord knoweth.

There is an interesting Orthodox Christian teaching about your question in the 4th century Apothegmata Patrum, from the life of St. Anthony the Great.