GameBanshee Forums

No problem SS, I'll catch you tomorrow. It's time for bed. Good night all. )

Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>We shall have to disagree. Again, I can only recommend that you read the the Christian mystics I've mentioned, and perhaps consider John 14: 19-20, 1 John 4:16, and 1 Corinthians 6:17.</STRONG>

Let's take a look, shall we?

<STRONG>In just a little while the world will not see me again, but you will. For I will live again, and you will, too. When I am raised to life again, you will know that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you.</STRONG>
~John 14:19-20

Well, by your reason, since I am in a house, I am the house. I assure you, I am not a house.

<STRONG>We know how much God loves us, and we have put our trust in him. God is love, and all who live in love live in God, and God lives in them.</STRONG>
~1 John 4:16

Refer to what I said in response to John 14: 19-20.

<STRONG>But the person who is joined to the Lord becomes one spirit with him.</STRONG>
~1 Corinthians 7:17

That one could be misinterpreted to mean what you're saying, I guess. It is refering, however, to the same idea of a husband and wife becoming one. It is a figurative statement. Let me show you the rest of that.

<STRONG>And don't you know that if a man joins himself to a prostitute, he becomes one body with her For the Scriptures say, "The two are united into one." But the person who is joined to the Lord becomes one spirit with him.</STRONG>
~1 Corinthians 7:16-17

See?

[ 10-08-2001: Message edited by: Sailor Saturn ]

Originally posted by Darkpoet:
<STRONG>No problem SS, I'll catch you tomorrow. It's time for bed. Good night all. )</STRONG>

Good night, Dp. Have fun!

Sailor Saturn writes:
But the person who is joined to the Lord becomes one spirit with him.
~1 Corinthians 7:17

That one could be misinterpreted to mean what you're saying, I guess.

An interpretation different from yours isn't automatically a misinterpretation. You really should break out of that habit, you know.

It is refering, however, to the same idea of a husband and wife becoming one. It is a figurative statement. Let me show you the rest of that.

And don't you know that if a man joins himself to a prostitute, he becomes one body with her For the Scriptures say, "The two are united into one." But the person who is joined to the Lord becomes one spirit with him.
~1 Corinthians 7:16-17

See?

Do *you* see? "BUT the person who is joined..." In other words, the person joined thus, spiritually, to the deity, is joined after a completely different fashion (hence, the conjunction BUT) than that achieved through union with another human being.

Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>An interpretation different from yours isn't automatically a misinterpretation. You really should break out of that habit, you know.</STRONG>

It isn't a habit as that is not what I'm doing. To interpret that verse the way you are speaking of is a misinterpretation.

Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>Do *you* see? "BUT the person who is joined..." In other words, the person joined thus, spiritually, to the deity, is joined after a completely different fashion (hence, the conjunction BUT) than that achieved through union with another human being.</STRONG>

Let me reiterate. *slowly, with pauses* It...is....FIGURATIVE. The Christian mystics might interpret it that way, but they are the only Christians that do so. You are doing what you said you don't do and proving my point about you doing this. You're telling me what Christians believe, yet what you're saying we believe is not what we believe. Wanna try it again? Third times the charm. *rolleyes*

Originally posted by Sailor Saturn:
<STRONG>Let me reiterate. *slowly, with pauses* It...is....FIGURATIVE. The Christian mystics might interpret it that way, but they are the only Christians that do so. You are doing what you said you don't do and proving my point about you doing this. You're telling me what Christians believe, yet what you're saying we believe is not what we believe. Wanna try it again? Third times the charm. *rolleyes*</STRONG>

Let's hope third time's a charm: you're still missing my point. I'm saying what *some* Christians believe. You're telling me I can't do this, and you're laying down the law about what *all* Christians believe. I have repeatedly stated only an opinion by some Christians, and said this, time and again. And time and again, you have told me that no, it isn't the opinion of any Christians, that it is non-Christian, etc. Read our exchange again, if you're having any trouble understanding this.

I'll say it again: you're welcome to your interpretation, but as I've repeatedly said above, other interpretations exist. The existence of mutliple interpretations does not invalidate any of them.

Got that?

One other point:

The Christian mystics might interpret it that way, but they are the only Christians that do so.

When you're hired on as spokesperson for all Christians, please tell me. Until that time, I don't see you, or anybody else, as having been given the job to state what any Christian--save you, alone--believe in your heart.

[ 10-09-2001: Message edited by: fable ]

Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>Let's hope third time's a charm: you're still missing my point. I'm saying what *some* Christians believe. You're telling me I can't do this, and you're laying down the law about what *all* Christians believe. I'll say it again: you're welcome to your interpretation, but as I've repeatedly said above, other interpretations exist. The existence of mutliple interpretations does not invalidate any of them.

Got that? </STRONG>

*shakes her head* Technically you aren't telling me what we believe now, you're covering your butt.

Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sailor Saturn writes:
The idea you stated that started all of this, the one about people being God(or something like that, I don't remember your exact wording) is very humanistic and not what Christians believe...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We shall have to disagree. Again, I can only recommend that you read the the Christian mystics I've mentioned, and perhaps consider John 14: 19-20, 1 John 4:16, and 1 Corinthians 6:17.</STRONG>

Perhaps you misinterpreted what I said. When I said "Christian," I was refering to the whole of Christianity in general. There are always those who do not believe what the general whole beleives. I was not saying that these Christian mystics don't believe it. I was saying that Church of Christ, Baptists, Lutherans, Catholics, United Church of Christ, United Lutheran, etc, as a whole, don't believe that.

Do not revert back to that bandwagon crap because I don't agree with the whole, nor do they agree with me. We agree with each other.(Yes, there is a difference, and yes I'm playing with semantics, but I can't think of a better way to get the point I'm making across ).

Here, let me simplify all this for you so that you can understand.

To be a Christian, one must believe in God, that Jesus is God's son, that Jesus died on the cross to take our sins away, that Jesus rose from the grave 3 days later, and you must have accept Christ Jesus into you're heart as your Saviour.

If a Christian mystic has done this, then they are a Christian. Misquided, perhaps, but a Christian nonetheless.

If a Christian Wicca has done this, then they are a Christian. One would doubt the varacity of their claim to be a Christian, but that doesn't mean they are not a Christian.

Likewise, if someone is just being a "good religious person" and going to church and all that stuff, but does not believe and has not done the aforementioned, he isn't a Christian, even if he claims to be one.

Now do you understand what a Christian believes? If not, then there is very little hope that you will ever come to understand this which saddens me greatly.

Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>When you're hired on as spokesperson for all Christians, please tell me. Until that time, I don't see you, or anybody else, as having been given the job to state what any Christian--save you, alone--believe in your heart.</STRONG>

And yet you seem to think you have the right to do that "job."

You know what, I am a spokesperson for Christ, the foundation of Christianity. That is what all Christians are. I

<STRONG>Jesus came and told his disciples, "I have been given complete authority in heaven and on earth. Therefore, go and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Teach these new disciples to obey all the commands I have given you. And be sure of this: I am with you always, even to the end of the age."</STRONG>
~Matthew 28:18-20

It's called the Great Commission. Perhaps you've heard of it?

You, on the other hand, as a non-Christian, have no right to tell me what any "Christian" believes.

[quote]Sailor Saturn writes:

Perhaps you misinterpreted what I said. When I said "Christian," I was refering to the whole of Christianity in general. There are always those who do not believe what the general whole beleives.

You know, you've already been wrong about Christian mysticism, which you said didn't exist. This should perhaps give you pause about making more statements concerning what anybody else believes, since you don't know the definitions of some basic religious concepts.

I was not saying that these Christian mystics don't believe it. I was saying that Church of Christ, Baptists, Lutherans, Catholics, United Church of Christ, United Lutheran, etc, as a whole, don't believe that.

Again, you are speaking for millions for of people, and presuming to say what they believe. I am beginning to get the impression that you actually think it's true.

To be a Christian, one must believe in God, that Jesus is God's son, that Jesus died on the cross to take our sins away, that Jesus rose from the grave 3 days later, and you must have accept Christ Jesus into you're heart as your Saviour.

If a Christian mystic has done this, then they are a Christian. Misquided, perhaps, but a Christian nonetheless.

As you didn't even know what a Christian mystic was until it was explained to you earlier tonight, and as you've never read anything by any mystic, your assumption that they're "misguided" is less than complimentary to you.

Likewise, if someone is just being a "good religious person" and going to church and all that stuff, but does not believe and has not done the aforementioned, he isn't a Christian, even if he claims to be one.

Now do you understand what a Christian believes? If not, then there is very little hope that you will ever come to understand this which saddens me greatly.

You're still missing the point. Read back to the beginning of this whole conversation. It wasn't your version of the Athanasian Creed, with two People instead of Three, that started matters off. It was the fact that I'd stated an interpretation of the union between god and the individual soul which you simply announced wasn't believed by Christians. Not some Christians, all Christians.

You're welcome to raise other points, like your creed, but it is of no relevance to this conversation. There are "true Christians" by your definition who certainly are mystics, and who certainly have embraced the point I raised. Numbers are irrelevant, for the purposes of our conversation, since you declared they didn't exist.

Now, go read Jacob Boehme, and maybe a few other Christian mystics. Then come back, and we'll continue this. We'll also find out what you think about the union of godhood and manhood in Jesus, since you left that out of your creed.

[ 10-09-2001: Message edited by: fable ]

Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>Perhaps you misinterpreted what I said. When I said "Christian," I was refering to the whole of Christianity in general. There are always those who do not believe what the general whole beleives.

You know, you've already been wrong about Christian mysticism, which you said didn't exist. This should perhaps give you pause about making more statements concerning what anybody else believes, since you don't know the definitions of some basic religious concepts.</STRONG>

Excuse me, but the definition I was using is a valid definition of "mystic." That was a matter of misunderstanding the definition you used.

Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>I was not saying that these Christian mystics don't believe it. I was saying that Church of Christ, Baptists, Lutherans, Catholics, United Church of Christ, United Lutheran, etc, as a whole, don't believe that.

Again, you are speaking for millions for of people, and presuming to say what they believe. I am beginning to get the impression that you actually think it's true.</STRONG>

I'm speaking for millions of Christians who believe the same thing I believe when it comes to these important issues. Our exact beliefs vary, but we all agree on the important issues. What you stated that Christian mystics believe is humanistic. True Christians do not believe in humanistic philosophies, unless they are misguided.

Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>To be a Christian, one must believe in God, that Jesus is God's son, that Jesus died on the cross to take our sins away, that Jesus rose from the grave 3 days later, and you must have accept Christ Jesus into you're heart as your Saviour.

If a Christian mystic has done this, then they are a Christian. Misquided, perhaps, but a Christian nonetheless.

As you didn't even know what a Christian mystic was until it was explained to you earlier tonight, and as you've never read anything by any mystic, your assumption that they're "misguided" is less than complimentary to you. </STRONG>

Actually, after you explained the definition, I did know what a Christian mystic is. Before that, I was thinking in the wrong direction because I thought you meant something else. I consider them misguided, yes. However, I did not state what I consider them to be. I said "misguided, perhaps." I did not say they are misguided, I stated that perhaps they are misguided.

Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>Likewise, if someone is just being a "good religious person" and going to church and all that stuff, but does not believe and has not done the aforementioned, he isn't a Christian, even if he claims to be one.

Now do you understand what a Christian believes? If not, then there is very little hope that you will ever come to understand this which saddens me greatly.

You're still missing the point. Read back to the beginning of this whole conversation. It wasn't your version of the Athanasian Creed, with two People instead of Three, that started matters off. It was the fact that I'd stated an interpretation of the union between god and the individual soul which you simply announced wasn't believed by Christians. Not some Christians, all Christians. </STRONG>

I said all True Christians. Then I stated that the majority(IIRC the exact wording, Christianity as a whole, which means the majority) believes.

Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>You're welcome to raise other points, like your creed, but it is of no relevance to this conversation. There are "true Christians" by your definition who certainly are mystics, and who certainly have embraced the point I raised. Numbers are irrelevant, for the purposes of our conversation, since you declared they didn't exist.</STRONG>

I know not this creed you speak of. When did I state that I have a creed, ne? I said they didn't exist when I thought you were speaking of something else. Once I realized what you were speaking of, I took back my statement that they don't exist. As I have stated at least once before, there may be True Christians who believe what you're saying they believe. They, however, are in the minority extreme. Christianity as a whole, or Christianity in general(since you're now playing with semantics) do not believe in these humanistic philosophies.

Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>Now, go read Jacob Boehme, and maybe a few other Christian mystics. Then come back, and we'll continue this. We'll also find out what you think about the union of godhood and manhood in Jesus, since you left that out of your creed. </STRONG>

Here is something you keep ignoring. Since you are not a Christian, you have no right to say what any Christians believe. So, in response to your "ordering" me to go read Jacob Boehme, I tell you to go become a True Christian and then come back and tell me what we believe.

I'm also waiting for that list of books you're read by protestant authors, or did you post it and I not see it?

[ 10-09-2001: Message edited by: Sailor Saturn ]

[ 10-09-2001: Message edited by: Sailor Saturn ]

Fable and SS, would you please ease the fervour with which you are arguing, i know you both feel strongly about your points, but attacking each other is not necessary.

Posted by SS -

I know what you said. I was not arguing with you. I was merely making a clarification so that the lurkers don't get anymore confused than they already are.

Who's confused? If you are referring to the possibility of being confused by definitions, I'm not Just a little dizzy from the circular motion of this debate maybe

[ 10-09-2001: Message edited by: Yshania ]

Originally posted by Mr Sleep:
<STRONG>Fable and SS, would you please ease the fervour with which you are arguing, i know you both feel strongly about your points, but attacking each other is not necessary.</STRONG>

@Sleep, please read back and point out to me where I've demonstrated "fervor" in this particular discussion. I don't feel "strongly" about my points; I'm only trying to correct a few definitions of a person who speaks for millions, and can't be wrong. There's no anger or heat in my comments, and if you want to stop this thread now, I can do so without any animosity to @SS, you, or anybody else. Just say the word.

[ 10-09-2001: Message edited by: fable ]

Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>@Sleep, please read back and point out to me where I've demonstrated "fervor" in this particular discussion. I don't feel "strongly" about my points; I'm only trying to correct a few definitions of a person who speaks for millions, and can't be wrong. There's no anger or heat in my comments, and if you want to stop this thread now, I can do so without any animosity to @SS, you, or anybody else. Just say the word.

[ 10-09-2001: Message edited by: fable ]</STRONG>

Word

I think that the conversation had come to it's logical conclusion anyway. I am not going to close this thread as of yet.

Originally posted by Darkpoet:
<STRONG>Georgi, since SS is ignoring me. You want to go out and had a few drinks??? I'm buying. </STRONG>

Sorry DP, I went to bed... But sure, as long as it's more intoxicating than Dr Pepper

Originally posted by Yshania:
<STRONG>Who's confused? If you are referring to the possibility of being confused by definitions, I'm not Just a little dizzy from the circular motion of this debate maybe </STRONG>

Well said @Ysh

I replied here to @SS while @Sleep was saying The Word; for the Word proceedeth all else. Therefore, in accordance with his request which I saw afterwards, I am removing the contents of my reply. Pax vobiscum, and all like that there.

But damn, it was a *good* reply.

[ 10-09-2001: Message edited by: fable ]

Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>I replied here to @SS while @Sleep was saying The Word; for the Word proceedeth all else. Therefore, in accordance with his request which I saw afterwards, I am removing the contents of my reply. Pax vobiscum, and all like that there.

But damn, it was a *good* reply. </STRONG>

Since Sleep said The Word, perhaps you could PM me what you wrote here(or at least as best as your memory will allow).

@Sleep, If you think I was getting angry or anything like that, you are quite mistaken. In fact, I spent most the time laughing at much of what fable said and did, no offense meant at fable. I don't think it necessary to end this discussion as I was waiting for two specific responses from fable on things he kept ignoring, where his right to declare what any Christians believe comes from; and his list of protestant written books that he has read and the authors that wrote them(If this was posted and I missed it, then please point me to it). I also don't see it necessary to end this discussion since fable and I were remaining rather calm.

Sailor Saturn writes:
Since Sleep said The Word, perhaps you could PM me what you wrote here(or at least as best as your memory will allow).

I've saved it to file, but I'd rather not email it privately, since it was intended for public comment--if anybody else wished to present a third party viewpoint, suggestions, approval or disapproval.

I still think your range and grasp of Christian subject matter would be improved by reading the great minds and hearts that have ranged across this field over the ages, @SS--no insult meant. Please, give it some thought.

Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>I've saved it to file, but I'd rather not email it privately, since it was intended for public comment--if anybody else wished to present a third party viewpoint, suggestions, approval or disapproval.</STRONG>

Well, I'm hoping Sleep will revoke his Word.

Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>I still think your range and grasp of Christian subject matter would be improved by reading the great minds and hearts that have ranged across this field over the ages, @SS--no insult meant. Please, give it some thought.</STRONG>

I don't doubt it would. Likewise, your understanding of Christian beliefs would improve greatly if you became a Christian.