Skip to main content

Hi to my Forum Friends,

Neal Hughes tell us, "We (Episcopalians) are not biblical literalists, we believe in the inspiration of the holy scriptures, not their dictation, faith, and tradition along with logic to guide us. We are not legalistic, nor are we exclusivists. We claim to have no monopoly on faith, truth, or anything else in the world. We are free to believe whatever dogma we personally wish, so long as we follow the Book of Common Prayer and subscribe to the Creeds. The Church teaches that the Bible contains all that is necessary for salvation, but not that it is divine in and of itself, or that it is the literal reading is the sine non qua for 'True Belief.'"

It seems you tend to cling more closely to the Anglican Church (Church of England) than to the Episcopalian Church of America; you tend to honor the Archbishop, as Catholics honor the Pope. You say your Anglican Church is not exclusivist -- meaning it is an ecumenical church -- meaning that you will welcome anyone, worshipping any god. Right? Oh, but, my mistake. They must follow your Book of Common Prayer. Forget the Bible -- as long as they follow your Book of Common Prayer. To you, the Bible is an afterthought. Just curious, Neal, when you go to church -- do you take a Bible with you?

Then, you say, "The Anglican Communion is not a fundamentalist church. We are the reformed branch of ancient Roman Catholicism, officially rejecting the powers of the Bishop of Rome in being the single arbiter of doctrine, of novel dogma and doctrine (such as advanced Mariology, the doctrine of Papal Infallability, etc.) and in former times, the monopoly of the Latin language in official church proceedings. We reject a definition of transubstantiation or constanstubiation, instead, relying upon the Holy Spirit to do whatever it is He or She does in the transmutation of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ."

Actually, Neal, the Church of England (Anglican) came into being when King Henry VIII wanted to divorce his wife, Catherine of Aragon, because she could not produce a male heir to the throne. He petitioned the pope and was refused the right to divorce. Good old King Henry had a solution. He took England out of the Roman Catholic Church, formed the Church of England, and made himself the "Supreme Head of the Church." In other words, King Henry was now the Pope of the Church of England.

However, because Henry liked the Roman Catholic ways -- he did not change any of the church rituals nor the worship -- except to place himself as the head and to make membership mandatory for all the English people. In every other way, the Church of England under King Henry VIII was exactly like the Roman Catholic Church -- except it answered to King Henry in England and not to the pope in Rome.

King Henry sent Catherine of Aragon into exile, then into prison, and married Anne Boleyn -- later having Catherine beheaded.

Catherine had given Henry a daughter, Mary Tudor. As it turned out, the only child Anne Boleyn could give Henry was Elizabeth; so, she, too, was put aside and later beheaded. Henry married Jane Seymour who finally gave him a son, Edward.

When Henry died; Edward became king, but was too young to rule -- so, a committee ruled for him. He finally became full king; but, died at an early age. Mary, Henry's oldest daughter, then became Queen -- and took England back into the Roman Catholic Church.

After Mary, Elizabeth became Queen and once more took England back to the Protestant Church of England. So, when you say, "We are the reformed branch of ancient Roman Catholicism" -- you really mean that the Anglican Church
(Church of England) is the ping-pong result of King Henry's marriage-go-round -- and fluctuated with the religious desires of whoever was on the throne following Henry.

Next, you tell us, "If you have been baptized with water in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, then you are welcome in any Episcopal or Anglican Church in the world to attend divine services, to confess your sins in public, to seek God's forgiveness and be assured that it is granted in the eating of Our Lord's blessed Body and the drinking of His Blessed Blood."

First, let me say, no one is saved through baptism. If so, that would mean that one could be saved through works; for that would constitute "works" -- doing something to earn salvation. No amount of works we can do will make us righteous enough to get into heaven.

Ephesians 2:8-9 tells us, "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast."

Baptism is an outward manifestation of your inner commitment to follow Jesus Christ. It is your way of telling the world, "Look, I belong to Jesus Christ! I am a Christ Follower, a Christian!"

If this were not true, the thief on the cross could not have been saved -- for he was not baptized.

Jesus left us two ordinances: Baptism, as a symbol of our commitment to Him. And, Communion, the Lord's Supper, which we do in remembrance of Him. Neither can or will save us; they are just our way of following Him and honoring His sacrifice for us.

We read in 1 Corinthians 11:24-25, "And when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, 'This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me.' In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, 'This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.'"

Neal, you tell us that, "If you have been baptized with water in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, then you are welcome in any Episcopal or Anglican Church. . ."

Tell me, does your church have someone at the door of the church verifying that a person has been baptized BEFORE they are allowed to enter your church? How do we prove our baptism? When I was baptized -- at the age of fifty -- I was not given any Baptism ID card that I could use to prove my baptism. I guess that means I should never have been allowed to enter an Episcopalian church -- or that the Episcopalian churches I attended do not follow the rules of the Church of England.

And, Neal, you say we should, ". . .confess your sins in public. . ."

Yet, Jesus tells us, in Matthew 6:5-6, "When you pray, you are not to be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on the street corners so that they may be seen by men. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full. But you, when you pray, go into your inner room, close your door and pray to your Father who is in secret, and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you."

Who is right, Neal -- you, the Anglican church -- or Jesus?

Then, Neal, you tell us, "You can believe in Adam and Eve as literal or not, you can tribulate and rapturate all you want, but expect an (lifted) eyebrow or a smirk, and don't bring it up in coffee hour. You will not hear this stuff in a pulpit. We preach the Gospel! We read portions of the Old Testament, the Psalms, and the Epistles along with the Gospel every day, and especially on Sunday, as not all churches are open every day of the week."

Neal, in as few words as possible -- to you, what is the Gospel?

You say, "We have no eschatology, trusting in Our Lord's own words and not men's interpretation of apocolyptic literature."

In the book of Revelation 1:18-19, Jesus tells the apostle John, "Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, and the living One; and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of death and of Hades. Therefore write the things which you have seen, and the things which are, and the things which will take place after these things."

What is Jesus speaking of when He says: "the things which you have seen"? He means the things John saw when he was walking with Jesus and His other apostles during His earthly ministry -- and the things he saw after the crucifixion -- up until the day Jesus appeared to John on the Island of Patmos.

How about: "the things which are"? Jesus was talking about the churches (Revelation 2 and 3), the church era, which we are in right now.

And, when Jesus said to John: "the things which will take place after these things"? He was speaking of the things which will occur after the church era, i.e., after the church is taken out of the world in the Rapture. "These thing which will take place" include the Tribulation, His Glorious Return, His Millennial Kingdom, His judgments, and His taking His people into eternity with Him.

That, my Friend, is called Eschatology. Eschatology is from the Greek word "eschatos" meaning "last." This is the doctrine of "last things," in relation to human death, resurrection, judgment, afterlife, and the end of the world. In other words, the End Times.

And, in Revelation 22:7, Jesus tells us, "And behold, I am coming quickly. Blessed is he who heeds the words of the prophecy of this book." By book, He is referring to the book of Revelation -- and the prophecy He is speaking of is the End Times prophecies, i.e., Eschatology.

Neal, you state, "We find it necessary to practice what we preach, however, and that includes turning the other cheek and feeding the hungry and outreach to the downtrodden."

If you combine that -- along with the full Gospel; with the teaching of heaven and hell; with the teaching of repentance, with the teaching of His free gift of salvation; with the teaching of His return for His church; with the teaching of His dealing with the apostasy of Israel, with the teaching of His Glorious Return to take full title deed of earth; with the teaching of His judgments; and the teachings of eternity with Him in heaven -- then, you have the evangelical conservative church's teachings. You have Evangelical Conservative Theology.

With what you have stated alone -- you have only a Social Theology; which is good as far as it goes. However, it does nothing to teach salvation, nor to assure eternal salvation for those being served -- nor eternal salvation for those doing the serving. In other words, you have a hollow theology.

You declare, "We do not teach the novel doctrine of "spontaneous salvation" that so many contemporary Protestants do. We do not for the simple reason that it is not part of the apostolic faith."

It might not be a part of your apostolic faith; but, it is from the Bible. So, my Friend, please explain, to all of us, the process of being saved in your Anglican church. What happens? How does one go about knowing he has attained eternal salvation? How does anyone, in your church, know he has eternal security in Jesus Christ? Can anyone in your church know for sure that he/she is saved and going to heaven? If someone were to ask you, "Neal, do you have salvation? Do you know, for sure, that you are going to heaven?" -- how would you answer?

A Christian believer should be able to answer that question, without hesitation, and say, "Yes, I am going to spend eternity in heaven with Jesus Christ!" Neal, can you sincerely make this affirmation?

Neal, you tell us, "You can take your prophecy interpretations and add them to the long, long, tired list of prior now gratefully forgotten (for the most part) predecessors. Just google 'Archbishop of Canterbury' and 'Lambeth Palace, London'."

Quite frankly, I would have trouble worshipping in a church where the senior pastor, or church leader, resides in a PALACE.

Once again, you tell us, "We are not biblical literalists, we believe in the inspiration of the holy scriptures, not their dictation, faith, and tradition along with logic to guide us."

Yet, 2 Timothy 3:16-17 tells us, "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work."

And, 2 Peter 1:20-21, we read, "But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."

In 2 Timothy, we are told that ALL SCRIPTURE is inspired by God. And, this second Scripture passage from 2 Peter tells us, first, that prophecy of Scripture is not a matter of any man's private interpretation -- that no one might use it for his own private gain. What does this mean? As with all the Bible; Scripture verifies Scripture. If we find a prophecy in one portion of the Bible; we should find an explanation or a fulfillment of that prophecy in another place in the Bible. If not, then it is not a prophecy from God. For no Scripture prophecy was ever made from the mind of man -- but was inspired by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit spoke the prophecy into the mind of the prophets.

Since ALL SCRIPTURE is inspired by God, as you have affirmed -- which part of His Inspired Word do you want to ignore? If it is inspired by God, as you affirm, why would He inspire the writings to be metaphors, allegories, and myths? So, in Bible interpretation, a good rule of thumb is: "If a passage can be taken literally -- do so." What you will find is that in books such as Psalms and Proverbs; poetic books, we will find many metaphors and allegories -- yet, they will lead us to a meaning. In books such as the the books of history, beginning with Genesis and continuing through Malachi; along with the four Gospels and the epistles, we take literally. In Revelation, there is much symbolism -- but, when we sit the prophecies found in Revelation alongside Daniel, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and many other books containing prophecy -- we see the literal meaning coming forth.

No, Neal, we cannot write off any portion of the Bible. It is our sole, only, source of authority in the Christian world.

Therefore, Neal, if your church ignores prophecy -- you are ignoring a large portion of the Bible. How do you reconcile the Scripture passages in 2 Timothy and 2 Peter with what you have stated above about prophecy and prophetic interpretation?

And, you say, "We are not legalistic, nor are we exclusivists. We claim to have no monopoly on faith, truth, or anything else in the world."

In John 14:6, we read, "Jesus said to him, 'I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.'"

That sounds pretty exclusive to me. Now, is Jesus lying -- or are you wrong?

Finally, Neal, you say, "We are free to believe whatever dogma we personally wish, so long as we follow the Book of Common Prayer and subscribe to the Creeds."

In other words, Neal, you throw out the Bible -- and look only at the Book of Common Prayers and your Creeds for salvation. The Bible, I believe you told us, is not divine -- only a book to read to learn philosophically how to live. Yet, you imply that your salvation depends upon how well you adhere to your Book of Common Prayers. Is this true? Is this the Way to salvation in the Episcopalian church you attend?

Neal, you have replaced the Word of God, the Bible, with your own man-made book of prayer -- and you want to tell us this is not cultic?

To all my Forum Friends: I am sure that many of you are Episcopalian. Does the church you attend really teach what Neal is preaching on the Forum? The Episcopalian churches I attended, while more liturgical than I prefer -- were still God-fearing, Bible teaching churches. How about yours? Does it teach the "hate all other churches, hate all Christians" attitude that Neal advocates on the Forum? Or does your church teach the Bible?

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 0_-_CROS_BIB
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

The Episcopal church certainly uses the Bible. a passage from the old testament, psalms, and new testament are read each Sunday. In a 3 year rotation, the whole bible has been covered.
The prayer book continues to be revised and brought in line with contemporary life. It contains sthe order of services, morning prayer, baptism, funeral, etc., with many prayers for most any occasion i.e. birthday, anniversary, for the sick, etc. It does not in anyway replace the bible.
quote:
Originally posted by annehr@comcast.net:
The Episcopal church certainly uses the Bible. a passage from the old testament, psalms, and new testament are read each Sunday. In a 3 year rotation, the whole bible has been covered.
The prayer book continues to be revised and brought in line with contemporary life. It contains sthe order of services, morning prayer, baptism, funeral, etc., with many prayers for most any occasion i.e. birthday, anniversary, for the sick, etc. It does not in anyway replace the bible.

Hi Anne,

I know that -- and you know it. However, I am not sure Neal does. Your prayer book seems to be much like the Catholic Missal which is used in their mass. I still have mine from days of old.

It is just that anytime a Christian on the Forum mentions the Bible or any Scripture -- Neal treats this as anathema -- as though we are bringing the curse of God down upon the Forum.

This is why I wrote and posted this. I have known many Episcopalians and I know that Neal is not typical of any I have met.

Anne, thank you for your comments.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill
Bill, your ignorance never ceases to amaze me. The apostolic faith does not teach "instant salvation," where just saying a prayer leads you into heaven straight way. Lutherans, Episcopalians, Orthodox Christians, Lutherans, Copts, etc. do not "get saved," we hope for salvation and are assured of it thought the grace of Our Lord in granting forgiveness of our sins and regeneration in the sacraments of baptism and the Holy Mysteries of the Altar.

You might say that we "get saved" every time we take Communion and repent of our sins publicly. Do you have that assurance that God will forgive you if you are sincere and turn from them?

For the record, Lambeth Palace is not a "palace" like the White House or Buckingham or Holyrood HOuse or Kensington -- it is the administrative center of the Church of England. Like Whitehall Palace is the home of the British foreign office and Westminster Palace is the home of Parliament. Blenheim Palace is the home of the Dukes of Marlborough, where Winston Churchill was born. St. James Palace is where the Queen Mother lived and where foreign ambassadors are accredited, even though it is old and full of rats and the Danish-German-Scottish woman with the crown greets them in Buckingham.

Bill, you equivocate and outright lie. You spread terrible stuff about Dr. Dino, Bema Seat Judgments and other crap of which I am and the majority of the world am not aware as if it were truth and the ultimate litmus test of Xity. You lie when you say that the abbreviation X for Christ is a blasphemy. It is ancient and traditional, and is not an "eks" but a "Chi" in Greek, the first letter of XPICTOC, or Christos.

I am so glad that you spell my name correctly, though, unlike Braylan who tends to be a bit orthographically challenged at times.

Where does your cult meet, by the way? In a garage behind a transmission shop cum meth lab in Riverside? Do you catch your own snakes or do you buy them? Have you ever been bitten? Did it hurt much if you were?

You do handle snakes don't you? It is in Mark, you know. . .
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Bill Gray:
Hi to my Forum Friends,



King Henry sent Catherine of Aragon into exile, then into prison, and married Anne Boleyn -- later having Catherine beheaded.

/QUOTE]

Whoa, Bill - Katharine of Aragon was not beheaded. She died of natural causes - probably stomach cancer. The whole church reformation was at Anne Boleyn's insistance. She kept a copy of the Book of Common Prayer in her privy chamber for her ladies in waiting to read daily. Anne was not nearly the vixen the movies and unfortunately history have portrayed her as being.

Henry was stunned by her intellect as much as her beauty.

He only went along with the idea of church reform because #1. Thomas Cranmer agreed to give him a divorce from Katharine if he (A closet Lutheran - who was later burned as a heretic under Mary) was made Archbishop of Canterbury and #2. There was a penny per hearth tax in England that went to the Catholic church. When Henry established himself as head of the church, this money went to him.

Lust and greed had more to do with it than anything on Henry's part.

What most people do not know is that Anne Boleyn was a devout Christian and truly interested in church reform - not the bashing of the monasteries that went on under Henry and Thomas Cromwell (who replaced Cardinal Wolsey).

An easy way to remember what happened to Henry's six wives:
Divorced
Beheaded
Died
Divorced
Beheaded
Survived

Katharine of Aragon
Anne Boleyn
Jane Seymour
Anne of Cleves
Catherine Howard
Catherine Parr

After Henry and Edward died, Lady Jane Grey served 9 days as queen before Mary ascended the throne.

Incidentally, my eight year old is planning to go trick or treating dressed as Anne Boleyn this year. Smiler

We're history nerds.

And yes, from my experience, Neal was right on about the goings on in the Episcopal Church.
Last edited by UnderContract
quote:
Originally posted by UnderContract:
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Gray:
Hi to my Forum Friends,

King Henry sent Catherine of Aragon into exile, then into prison, and married Anne Boleyn -- later having Catherine beheaded.

Whoa, Bill - Katharine of Aragon was not beheaded. She died of natural causes - probably stomach cancer. The whole church reformation was at Anne Boleyn's insistance. She kept a copy of the Book of Common Prayer in her privy chamber for her ladies in waiting to read daily. Anne was not nearly the vixen the movies and unfortunately history have portrayed her as being.

Henry was stunned by her intellect as much as her beauty.

He only went along with the idea of church reform because #1. Thomas Cranmer agreed to give him a divorce from Katharine if he (A closet Lutheran - who was later burned as a heretic under Mary) was made Archbishop of Canterbury and #2. There was a penny per hearth tax in England that went to the Catholic church. When Henry established himself as head of the church, this money went to him.

Lust and greed had more to do with it than anything on Henry's part.

What most people do not know is that Anne Boleyn was a devout Christian and truly interested in church reform - not the bashing of the monasteries that went on under Henry and Thomas Cromwell (who replaced Cardinal Wolsey).

An easy way to remember what happened to Henry's six wives:
Divorced
Beheaded
Died
Divorced
Beheaded
Survived

Katharine of Aragon
Anne Boleyn
Jane Seymour
Anne of Cleves
Catherine Howard
Catherine Parr

After Henry and Edward died, Lady Jane Grey served 9 days as queen before Mary ascended the throne.

Incidentally, my eight year old is planning to go trick or treating dressed as Anne Boleyn this year. Smiler

We're history nerds.

And yes, from my experience, Neal was right on about the goings on in the Episcopal Church.

Hi Under,

You are right. Thank you for the correction. The book I have does not say what killed her; only an illness. But, it does say that some, including Catherine's daughter, Mary, strongly suspected she was poisoned.

I would not say that Neal's personality nor his beliefs are relevant to all Episcopalian churches. We all realize that there has been a big split in the Episcopalian churches in America because of the gay bishop -- but, many have stood the course and split from England to join the convention in South Africa.

Recently an Episcopalian churche in Virginia won a court battle where the England faction claimed all church property belonged to them. The court, as I understand it, ruled in favor of the local church and gave the property to them.

Again, thank you for correcting me. I, too, am a history buff. But, mine tends to be more toward early America -- Native Americans, Revolutionary War, and Civil War.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill
Point of correction -- the African Churches of the Anglican Communion, not the South American ones is where the conservative schismatics have taken refuge, that and outright rejecting any bishop as currently ordained and forming their own denominations, some of them claim their bishops from the Church of Antioch, etc.

Bill, the Anglican Communion is not a "church" as you Protestants recognize it: it is a communion united only by the bishops in communion with one another and the Book of Common Prayer and subscribing to the oaths of office, among them being that the Bible contains all that is necessary to salvation.

There are Calvinists in Sydney who are always causing trouble in Lambeth and around the world, the Church of West Africa, the Church of East Africa, the Anglican Churches of Canada, Australia, NZ, South Africa, the Church of Ireland, the Episcopal Church of Scotland, the Church of Ireland, the Church in Wales, and the Church of England along with the Episcopal Church, formerly the PECUSA (Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States), and several more, including the Church of the Middle East, and the Churches of North and South India.

Add in the fact that all churches in the Communion are in full communion with the ECLA, the Old Catholics, the Mar Thoma church in India, and our shared polity is enormous.

We do not have a man-written creed like the Westminster or Augsburg Confessions, rather the ancient Universal Church Creeds and English translations of the various liturgies then current in the Sarum usage in Roman Church Salisbury and more from the Eastern Churches. There are also the 39 Articles, but they are not binding upon the Episcopal Church as they are basically English law with a few theological points added in for good measure.

As I wrote before and others amplified, the Church reads the Bible all the way through throughout the Cycle of the 3 years. The vast majority of the Book of Common Prayer is straight out of the Bible itself or else rephrasing of Biblical passages.

The Anglican Communion is noted for not making its members leave their brains on the coat rack when they enter the church.

It is said that we have no theology, per se, and that is true to a degree. We rely upon the Big Three: Scripture, Reason, and Tradition to guide the church through the bishops. Our clergy have very little power, most of it reserved to the lay members. Our clergy do not handle money, for example. The vestry does. The people of the congregation choose the vestry and the pastor and the delegates to the Annual Convention. The Convention chooses the new bishop when one is needed.

The bishop holds all title to all church property, not the congregation nor the ABC, nor the Presiding Bishop nor any other entity.

I cannot speak for the Episcopal Church no more than I can speak for any other entity -- my lack of hubris prevents such.

You have to realize that the Episcopal Church in the South -- as a general rule -- is very liberal and moderately high church in worship, although in many occasions the local tradition of the parish will vary from that rule of thumb. The same goes in NY and other areas of the country, as well. In the Midwest the Church is very conservative and extremely high church. Just google Nashota House and Sewanee (University of the South) to get a taste of the difference! I have no idea what goes on in the various provinces of California -- I know that a priest in Pasadena was taken to task for preaching an antiwar sermon and that San Jose wants to break from the National Church! Sounds pretty like the national church in that respect.

I am a firm churchman, a former 3 year vestryman, the youngest one ever on Long Island, and a delegate to the Annual Convention, and an ex officio member of the parish's parochial school board. I am a licensed lay reader and Eucharistic Minister under the Diocese of Long Island.

I have given my heart to my church for over 20 years and dislike your smugness when we have work to do. In fact, it makes you look foolish and faltering in your attempts to smear me somehow.

I find you personally perfidious, pestiferous, and parochial to the Nth Degree. I find your doctrine repugnant to common sense and the apostolic faith and any apologetics you attempt are bound to backfire due to your most unchristian attitude and largely impolite tone.
You are tiresome, silly and boring, except when I learn of such novelties as a Bema Seat Judgment and other things that I never imagined existed.

Just stick with your pink-wigged woman on the TV and her gay husband and let the real Christians (not those modern day Pharisees masquerading as such) get on with their lives. Leave the gays alone, and get a freaking life! Have you considered preaching to the Scientologists and Mormen in Cali? They need it before people in the Most Serene Christian Republic of Alabamastan do.

Ever yours in Tribulation,

Have a rapturous day!

Neal M. Hughes

p.s. You have no idea how much I relish you and Braylan taking offense to me: it makes my day when the pests such as you find fault in me!
Hi Neal,

I do believe I said, ''I would not say that Neal's personality nor his beliefs are relevant to all Episcopalian churches. We all realize that there has been a big split in the Episcopalian churches in America because of the gay bishop -- but, many have stood the course and split from England to join the convention in South Africa."

And, by the way, you still have not told me how folks are saved in your church. The way you seem to describe it, it is a process. However, you have not told me that process.

If you are saved -- how were you saved?

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill
Hi Neal,

You say, "I find you personally perfidious, pestiferous, and parochial to the Nth Degree. I find your doctrine repugnant to common sense and the apostolic faith and any apologetics you attempt are bound to backfire due to your most unchristian attitude and largely impolite tone.

You are tiresome, silly and boring, except when I learn of such novelties as a Bema Seat Judgment and other things that I never imagined existed."


Gee, Neal, I am sure happy that you are so POLITE to others on the Forum. You are truly a role model to me for polite dialogue.

By the way, why does one have to licensed to be a Bible reader in your church. Is there a test required to be a Bible reader? "Sorry, John, you are not qualified to be a Bible reader in our congregation. You tawk funny."

I have read the Bible many times in our church -- and the only license I have is my driver's license. Would that work?

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • Bible-Hole_NEAL
Bill the bishop licenses a reader/Eucharistic Minister after taking a class on the history of the church, the Anglican Communion, the history of the Bible and the Prayer Book.
It is hard, the final is having to recite the Lord's Prayer backwards in Latin from memory while having sex with a goat and skinning a black cat alive.
Can you imagine how hard it is just to pronounce "Mena. Aluces ni, airlog te, aitnetop . . . Muut nomen rutecifitcnas, sileoc ni se iuq retson retap," much less memorize it?
Actually it is to prevent crazy people from getting up and just foaming at the mouth.
quote:
Originally posted by nealmhughes:
Bill the bishop licenses a reader/Eucharistic Minister after taking a class on the history of the church, the Anglican Communion, the history of the Bible and the Prayer Book.
It is hard, the final is having to recite the Lord's Prayer backwards in Latin from memory while having sex with a goat and skinning a black cat alive.
Can you imagine how hard it is just to pronounce "Mena. Aluces ni, airlog te, aitnetop . . . Muut nomen rutecifitcnas, sileoc ni se iuq retson retap," much less memorize it?
Actually it is to prevent crazy people from getting up and just foaming at the mouth.

Hi to all,

So, now my Friends, we all know how Neal was saved. Anyone else you know saved this way?

Neal, I may be wrong. But, I do believe that if your bishop, your archbishop, your pope, or whoever you worship -- could see how your represent the Episcopalian church membership on this Forum -- I do believe he would revoke your license.

I'll stay with my Driver's License.

But, to make you happy, before I read the Bible in church or Bible study -- I will show my Driver's License first.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • Kitty_With_Ego_TEXT
Hi Neal,

Just an afterthought. I just reread your post and you tell me, "Bill the bishop licenses a reader/Eucharistic Minister after taking a class on the history of the church, the Anglican Communion, the history of the Bible and the Prayer Book."

Neal, I see no reference whatsoever to the Gospel, to Jesus Christ, to salvation, to evangelizing. All I see is CHURCH, CHURCH, CHURCH!

Do you worship the CHURCH -- or do you worship Jesus Christ?

You really seem to have it all backwards. The church does not save you. Only Jesus Christ can save you. And, He will if you will, by grace through faith, come to Him in repentence. He will save you. But, the church, your bishop, your archbishop, your Prayer Book -- none of these things can save you.

Once again, I ask you: in your church what must I do to be saved?

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 0_-_CROS_BIB-2_FAITH-1
quote:
Originally posted by Neal Hughes:
You need to find a black cat, a goat for sex, and memorize the Lord's Prayer in Latin while under the full moon at midnight.
Get real, old man.

Ah, yes, Neal,

I see you are still showing yourself to be the shining Christian role model in your method of dialogue. Your archbishop in jolly old England would be proud of you.

While I am quite sure that most of the folks in the church you attend (you do attend church, don't you?) are quite different from you; I have to wonder if they know the light in which you are painting their church in your writings on the Forum.

It reminds me of the story of the homeless man who was told to get better clothing if he wanted to attend the local church. The man prayed, "Lord, I am doing the best I can. What should I do to attend this church?"

And, the Lord replied, "I really don't know. I've never been invited to that particular church either."

Neal, you still have not told me what I must do to be saved in your church? Do you not know?

Is that why you keep attacking -- so you will not have to answer my question?

I guess that is what is meant by the saying, "A strong (or offensive) offense is the best defense." When you have no answer -- attack! I see you have been taking lessons from the rest of the Liberal Left crowd.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • Bible_Open-1b
quote:
Originally posted by nealmhughes:
Bill the bishop licenses a reader/Eucharistic Minister after taking a class on the history of the church, the Anglican Communion, the history of the Bible and the Prayer Book.
It is hard, the final is having to recite the Lord's Prayer backwards in Latin from memory while having sex with a goat and skinning a black cat alive.
Can you imagine how hard it is just to pronounce "Mena. Aluces ni, airlog te, aitnetop . . . Muut nomen rutecifitcnas, sileoc ni se iuq retson retap," much less memorize it?
Actually it is to prevent crazy people from getting up and just foaming at the mouth.



I can't stop laughing!!!!! my sides hurt. Big Grin
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Gray:


And, by the way, you still have not told me how folks are saved in your church. The way you seem to describe it, it is a process. However, you have not told me that process.

If you are saved -- how were you saved?

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill


Bill, stop being obtuse. STOP IT!!!!!!! It's annoying.
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Gray:
quote:
Originally posted by Neal Hughes:
You need to find a black cat, a goat for sex, and memorize the Lord's Prayer in Latin while under the full moon at midnight.
Get real, old man.

Ah, yes, Neal,

I see you are still showing yourself to be the shining Christian role model in your method of dialogue. Your archbishop in jolly old England would be proud of you.

While I am quite sure that most of the folks in the church you attend (you do attend church, don't you?) are quite different from you; I have to wonder if they know the light in which you are painting their church in your writings on the Forum.

It reminds me of the story of the homeless man who was told to get better clothing if he wanted to attend the local church. The man prayed, "Lord, I am doing the best I can. What should I do to attend this church?"

And, the Lord replied, "I really don't know. I've never been invited to that particular church either."

Neal, you still have not told me what I must do to be saved in your church? Do you not know?

Is that why you keep attacking -- so you will not have to answer my question?

I guess that is what is meant by the saying, "A strong (or offensive) offense is the best defense." When you have no answer -- attack! I see you have been taking lessons from the rest of the Liberal Left crowd.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill


Members of the Episcopal Church have told me that Neal's opinions and ideas are not consistent with those of other Episcopals. They say he is totally off base.
quote:
Originally posted by Monet:

Members of the Episcopal Church have told me that Neal's opinions and ideas are not consistent with those of other Episcopals. They say he is totally off base.


Members of the human race have told me that Monet's opinions and ideas are not consistent with those of other humans. They say she is totally off base.
quote:
Originally posted by notbuyingit:
quote:
Originally posted by Monet:

Members of the Episcopal Church have told me that Neal's opinions and ideas are not consistent with those of other Episcopals. They say he is totally off base.

Members of the human race have told me that Monet's opinions and ideas are not consistent with those of other humans. They say she is totally off base.

Neal, Neal, Neal, Now why have you gone and tried to hide behind a new posting name? Don't you know that "personality" or lack thereof -- cannot be hidden. Your fingerprints are showing.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • Card-Shark
Bill and Monet (or however you style yourself today) no I have posted under no other name but my own.
Now I see that your help meet unto Bill's holy work of lies, word twisting, failure to engage, and heresy has joined in as a one person amen corner. I reckon that makes Bill, Braylan, and Monette (pick a name any name) a veritable modern day Cerebus for Jesus.
Braylan already Minny Minny Tickled me. Good, it is like watching a Jerry Springer-Maury Povich-COPS-Intervention combo three hour special reading your anathemas and back of a matchbook mail order theological offerings: it makes me feel so much better about myself.

You know, you can find enough people who need to feel so special and singularly blessed that they speak for the entire community of God, but I don't have that need nor have I the hubris.

No, you three deserve each other so you can tell everyone how they are going to hell but you have been saved to the exclusion of the mass of Christians in history. You can take your collective and peculiar (in both the modern English and Latin senses of the word) beliefs and preach on, O 6000 Year Old Earthers; thanks to the Enlightenment, it is a free country in matters of religion.

I find you a sorry lot, full of venom and few examples of Our Lord's ministry. Obsessed with dogma that is novel and the sex lives of strangers, you are a really sad lot of Neopuritans at heart, although the actual ones would have sent you out into the wilderness alone to fare for yourselves for not toeing the church line in the 1600s as they did Roger Williams, Anne Hutchinson, et al.

Chacun a son gout, but leave my name out of your games, please. Preach all the heresy you want, but don't expect me to believe it, or evidently many others save for those you enjoy the merits of three hour sermons with no smoke breaks and an occasional "possession" more akin to something in Haiti than the Day of Pentecost.

I'm old fashioned when it comes to such things, and shall trust in the ancient orthodox apostolic church that has been going strong for nearly 2000 years, and 500 in English as reformed over Strong's exhaustive concordance of the Bible, Darbyite dominionist stuff and other such of their ilk.

"And lo, I beheld a three headed beast, yea, its head were three and were of the appearance of a dog with three heads. And writ upon the foreheads of the beast were the names of the beast, and its names were three and they were Heresy, Hubris, and Greedie-Gutt." Book of Neal, 1:1.

Greedie-gutt, along with Vinegar Tom, were the names of "demons" that Matthew Hopkins tortured out of some poor old woman back in Merrie Olde Puritan England, given the propensity of the megachurchers to give generously to their fat and sleek diamond ringed, capped teeth, face lifted and botoxed "preachers," I find it oddly apropos here.

Well, all done ranting now. Feel better. Must cook breakfast for dog. Must study the Bible for tomorrow's readings at church and not memorize it or it out of context.

Ciao, babies!

Oh, here is a very interesting link to a sermon from the chaplain at Princeton on salvation:

[URL=http://webscript.princeton.edu/~ecp/ECPResources/Sermon112804 ]Princeton Sermon[/URL]
My dear Monet(te/Monet-Lisa or however you style yourself of late), Cerebus was a three headed dog that guarded the Hades of Classical mythology. A troika is a three-member gubernatorial council, famously that of Stalin, Zinoviev and Trotsky until Stalin pitted one against the other and only he was left. Another group, perhaps more familiar to you would be Larry Fine, Moe Howard and Shemp Howard.
In no wise would I blaspheme against the Holy Trinity by even remotely intimating that you and your dullard dyad would even be remotely connected to the same.
Always remember that the gender and number of Romance adjectives ought to agree to those of the noun which it modifies!

To claim simple faith in Jesus Christ born, crucified and risen, you sure have a lot of addenda to the bases, don't you? Tribulation, rapture, a 6000 year old earth, a talking snake and the gays under interdict to begin with. . . sounds just like a paraphrase of the Sermon on the Mount, now doesn't it?
But thanks to Mr. Jefferson's actions and those of M. Arouet, you are free to spout whatever heresy and nonsense you like. Thank the Enlightenment for your right for that, my dear, or you would be fined so many times that you would not even be able to afford gas to go to your hoot and holler chapel, which would be in a barn and require a password to even enter.
I once, as a child heard a loud music of sorts and hand clapping and wondered what it was. I asked my grandmother and she told me the Pentecostals were having a revival. I was so curious that I knew she would never let me go near it, so I asked if I could walk down the road and pick up coke bottles and buy a coke at the store at the end of the street.
I was going to hear that music! I went, and went inside the front, and was scared half to death, and then people began to touch me and I screamed and ran outside -- to find my grandmother there! She spanked me hard and fast, and claimed it was for crossing the street, but I knew it was because she was afraid that someone who knew her and me would have seen me in there. I have never entered such a doorway again after the lecture/spanking/sermon I got that day when I was about 8 or 9!
I was utterly terrified at the shenanigans going on inside there! The crying and laughing and running around the room, and the preacher just chanting away at high volume -- I honestly thought I was in a room full of crazy people who would kidnap me and force me to buck dance and make moonshine for them as a slave! That was about the Manson Family days and I was deadly afraid of crazy cults then as a result.
Now, intellectually, I am just offended by them, but that deep fear of the crying and yelling remains with me still along with the drum set banging and the electric guitars and organ blaring and that man screaming at everyone. I went to confession the next week and confessed disobeying my grandmother by crossing the street. I was too ashamed to admit I had gone into a holy rolly show . . .by choice!
Neal,
Now I know your problem...you were frightened and punished by your mother for expanding your horizons religiously. Now, as a result, you feel obligated to punish anyone else who does not behave the way 'yo mama' raised you. I hate to tell you there is no 'hoopin' and hollerin' in my church. But you have your preconceived notions and I wouldn't want to spoil your freedom to rant and pass judgement. I was raised Baptist, but I am sure you are anti-baptist as well. Frankly, I find you to be such a buffoon that your opinion only justifies that I am exactly where I should be.
Here is an excellent soundly preached sermon presented by the rector of St. Francis Episcopal Church at Macon, Georgia.

Link

RE: the Baptists, who knows these days, now that the porcine Falwell is gone and there is no one to "out" a British children's program character as gay (Tinky Winky of the Teletubbies) and half of Texas wants to break away from the SBC, they are so split that it would be hard to characterize them at all, except as "Bill Moyers and Martin King Baptists" and "Ones who aren't like Moyers and King." Their sermons are generally very long and very boring, is about all I know first hand about them these days and you don't have to kneel at all, not even for Communion, and it is Welch's grape juice and not wine -- always a drawback in my eyes. The lack of bishops is always a problem, as I have said before -- as a rule, I don't completely trust churches that do not have bishops or people who do not keep dogs, but that's just me. The lack of bishops is apt to turn such chapels into cults of personality and open them up to teach heresy or dogma as doctrine. People who don't like dogs just ain't right.
An "aside" is a sudden change in the direction of a piece of work -- often interjected as a humorous device. It is the equivalent of a "stage whisper." One would think that a celebrated woman of letters, a veritable modern day Gertrude Stein or Willa Cather or Virginia Woolf would be familiar with this device.

Can you follow simple sentence structure, Latest Iteration of Monette? I never equated Baptists with people who did or did not keep dogs. I never equated dog ownership with anything. I made a joke about not really trusting churches without bishops or people who did not have dogs. It is based on the old adage, "Never trust people who don't smoke, drink, cuss, or keep dogs -- they are hiding something."
Why do you feel compelled to engage me and not the rector of St. Francis Church in Macon? He used the exact term I did to describe tribulation and rapture as did I earlier this year: claptrap. A priest. An ordained minister of the Gospel under the control of the Episcopal Bishop of Georgia, not a mere churchman and lay member such as myself.
Stick to your pseudo-pious polity, while I stick to the ancient apostolic faith of the Apsotles and the Church Fathers and not leave my brain on the hat rack when I enter a church.
You say "in the spirit," I say "hoot and holler," you call it "corn," we call it "maize."
If you are a Christian, I would strongly suggest you read 2 Samuel 6 vs. 12 - 23. If you are Baptist, Pentecostal, Episcopalian, it doesn't matter what denomination; read it and tell me if God looked down on David or if He blessed him. Read it and tell me if God blessed Michal or allowed her condemnation for making fun of what she did not understand.

You decide for yourself if God allows "hoopin and hollerin"

Good day!
Michal- daughter of Saul. Saul -hated David and was jealous of him and tried to kill him many times.
David - brings Ark back to the capital. Dances and sings and shouts in joy that it is back where it ought to be.
Michal - sees it and it makes her even more angry at her father's enemy.
David - hero in battle, hero who returns the holiest object in the ancient Hebrew faith to where it ought to be, not Saul.

Is that the smae thing as people who claim the Holy Spirit to jabber and call it "unknown tongues" or run around the church during a normal service, instead of a glorious celebration of the safe return of a great religious artifact?

But as long as it isn't outright heresy, let the peeps hoot and holler until the cows come home. It is cheaper than the circus, after all, and times are hard.

That stuff ain't for me, though. But I have been known to become a bit weepy at post-communion time with the choir gently singing while I am still kneeling in prayer and meditation after having taken in the Body and Blood of Our Lord that He might dwell in me and I in Him.

Still a free country. Barely. But it is. Now what I want to know is why can't we take our dogs to church except for Blessing of the Animals on St. Francis Day?
Neal, maybe you should be a Baptist after all! LOL For three year, I won't say when,Mickey walked with us to the very small Baptist church in a very small town in East Texas. He lay down in front of the pulpit and did not move a muscle until after the invitation (16 verses if it was a revival) and closing hymn. Was he asleep? Only God knew. I later came into the Episcopal Communion in Dr. Albert Johnston's l7th Century Literature class where I experienced a religious awakening which I treasure along with other mountaintop experiences. I hesitate to see whether Mickey would be allowed in any pulpit today.
I am "further" than an Episcopalian. I call myself an Anglican. I had a Roman Catholic friend who called me an orthodox Episcopalian. I have at one time in my life attended the Episcopal Church in the morning and Calvary Temple at night receiving spiritual nourishment from both. I still remember singing "O Come All Ye Faithful" in the spirit - all with my priest's blessing! Perhaps that is why I despair when I read or hear Christians arguing so vehemently. They can only hurt each other and the cause of Christ. "Preach the Gospel at all times, use words if necessary." - a paraphrase from St. Francis. If there is more you want to know, I will be happy to share in a cordial PM exchange.
Hi Neal,

You tell us, "That stuff ain't for me, though. But I have been known to become a bit weepy at post-communion time with the choir gently singing while I am still kneeling in prayer and meditation after having taken in the Body and Blood of Our Lord that He might dwell in me and I in Him."

Neal, if you truly have Jesus in you -- how can you be so full of anger and hatred toward others who profess Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior? If you truly have Christ in you -- how can you work so hard to tear down every other Christian and every other Christian church?

For the full time you have been on the Forum, I have never seen you say one nice thing about another Christian. Do you really believe that Jesus would have you display such animosity toward anyone; especially those who profess Him?

When you have been angry; when you have been so determined to destroy all other Christian churches -- have you ever once asked yourself, "If He were faced with this same situation; what would Jesus do?"

Some time, when you are ready to strike out in anger; when you pen is poised to write out your venom -- give that a thought and ask yourself if that is what Jesus would do.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill
quote:
Originally posted by Neal Hughes:
Feel better Bill? Man, that retirement can be the pits, now can't it old boy? Sometimes the boredom results in compulsive behavior and a desire to show oneself constantly as superior -- or so I hear.
Have you tried making bird houses or macrame?

Hi Neal,

In other words, you cannot answer the question I posed to you -- so, you squirm out by using Deep's Atheist Cutesy Comments Manual.

You, my Friend, claim all the knowledge of Christianity -- please lay aside Deep's book -- and let's talk from a Christian's book, the Bible. Can you or can you not answer my statement above?

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • Question-Mark-Red
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Gray:
quote:
Originally posted by CrustyMac:
Amazing, Bill. Are there any mirrors in your house?

Hi Crusty,

You are always there to cast stones at anyone who professes Christ; how about you tell us YOUR view of Christianity and what you practice.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill


Bill, you profess, but you don't practice. Anyone who isn't a fundemental evangelical is subject to ridicule from you. I don't cast stones at everyone who professes Christ, just the self-righteous ones, and the literalists who are just plain crazy.

My relationship with God is none of your business, but just for your satisfaction, you wouldn't get it, and you would disapprove. But it is honest, which is more than I can say for yours.
quote:
Originally posted by earthmomma:
I have at one time in my life attended the Episcopal Church in the morning and Calvary Temple at night receiving spiritual nourishment from both. I still remember singing "O Come All Ye Faithful" in the spirit - all with my priest's blessing!


The Episcopal Church doesn't have Oh Come All Ye Faithful in it's hymnal? What is wrong with them?
Bill, you started this a while ago when you got going on the gays and Rt. Rev. Gene Robinson and then the Anglican Communion. It is called tit for tat. I would never have told anyone what church I attended and held membership in, save for your lies and slander.
Then you got a-going on tribulation and rapture as doctrine and not dogma. Then it was Dr. Dino which you say we are compelled to believe or not be "True Christians" (marca registrada).
You dish out a lot of smack, but hide behind a mantle of holiness (self-professed) and special insight into matters theological and metaphysical, even the mechanism of the end of the world.
I tell you to leave your obsession behind on the end times, this silly obsession which you can neither alter nor change and get on with sowing your garden of good works to demonstrate to all men that you practice what you preach. I have never heard you say one word about trying to improve the lot of the downtrodden, only about how "lost" everyone else is. Isn't that odd what with the gigantic multi-billion dollar HIV and reforestation ourtreach to Africa and Asia that the Berean Baptists are sponsoring? Oh, wait, those don't exist, now do they? Not even a multi-penny program for the downtrodden. . . That says a lot about your kind to me.
A lot of satisfaction and hot air, but not much in this world to show for it but supposedly "saved" souls who raised their hands and now are good to go for the rest of their lives, the example of Our Lord be dashed.
By their fruits you will know them, sir, by their fruit, and you are fruitier at times than all the orchards in Washington State and in the pejorative sense, not the good way.
I claim to speak for no one but myself, I lack the self-confidence or audacity so to do, unlike you who speaks for all True Christian (marca registrada).
There is obviously good in every church, perhaps even in the Mormen, but I find it hard to find, it isn't like Bahai or Zoraoasterians, for example, where one would be hard to fault their theology or their morals. You read whatever you want to into whatever you want to and that is troubling, I do not know if it is a lack of basic reading comprehension, inability to tell satire from serious prose, or just bullheaded simpleminded with you. I just don't "get you" at all -- and I think I would be afraid of what I discovered were I to so do.
Look dude, do you believe in the Nicene and Apostles Creeds? Have you repented of your sins and turned from them? Have you been baptized and confessed your faith in Our Lord? Then you are a member of the Universal Church.
That is what I believe and should teach were anyone to ask me. There is one Vine but it has many branches, but some of them are filled with heresy and hatred, as one would expect with any institution, since people are vain and wish to have special gifts, knowledge and insight to the detriment of others. I reckon it makes them feel good about their otherwise miserable very ordinary lives.
Neal, I am curious...what have YOU done, or what do YOU do to help the downtrodden? Have you been to African as a missionary and helped the poor starving children there, or those with AIDS? Do you regularly send money to support a starving family? Have you adopted a hurting child? Or do you spend most of your time with your nose stuck in a computer in the library, googling all day long, searching for info to tear down others, their religion, and their sincere convictions. Please list all your fruits for us...inquiring minds would love to know.
Hi Neal,

You tell me, "Bill, you started this a while ago when you got going on the gays and Rt. Rev. Gene Robinson and then the Anglican Communion. It is called tit for tat. I would never have told anyone what church I attended and held membership in, save for your lies and slander."

First, ask yourself if Christians should be responding -- tit for tat -- especially on a public forum.

Neal, you and I both know, beyond any doubt, that the Bible condemns the homosexual lifestyle. Not the homosexual, for God loves him/her also -- but, God calls the homosexual lifestyle an abomination, a detestable act, an unnatural act, etc. So, God leaves no doubt where He stands regarding the homosexual lifestyle. However, just as with all sinners, God longs for all homosexuals, and all sinners -- to turn from their sinful lifestyle and turn to follow Jesus Christ. This is called repentance. If a person refuses to repent, refuses to turn from his/her sinful lifestyle -- how can he/she say they are following Jesus?

So, in that respect, Gene Robinson is a sinner who refuses to repent, who refuses to turn from his sinful lifestyle and turn to follow Jesus Christ. Based upon that, viewing the fruit of his life, I have to draw the conclusion that Gene Robinson is not a Christian; he is not a Christ follower -- regardless of what authority or title the Episcopalian church may bestow upon him.

Therefore, what I said was not a lie; nor was it slander. Gene Robinson is an open homosexual living in an openly active homosexual lifestyle with another man. That is neither a lie nor is it slander -- just the truth.

Now, let's get back to what you have been avoiding. In my previous post, I asked you:

Neal, if you truly have Jesus in you -- how can you be so full of anger and hatred toward others who profess Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior? If you truly have Christ in you -- how can you work so hard to tear down every other Christian and every other Christian church?

For the full time you have been on the Forum, I have never seen you say one nice thing about another Christian. Do you really believe that Jesus would have you display such animosity toward anyone; especially those who profess Him?

When you have been angry; when you have been so determined to destroy all other Christian churches -- have you ever once asked yourself, "If He were faced with this same situation; what would Jesus do?"

Some time, when you are ready to strike out in anger; when you pen is poised to write out your venom -- give that a thought and ask yourself if that is what Jesus would do.


It takes very little to get you on a multi-page rage -- but, you still have not responded to my question. You have written one long rambling paragraph -- but, you are still avoiding my question. If you cannot answer it, or will not answer it -- just tell me and I will let it pass. However, please do not try to hide from answering by putting up a huge smoke screen.

I pose a very simple, straight forward question: "Would Jesus react to Christians and to Christians sharing the Bible -- in the same manner that Neal Hughes has been responding for so long -- with hatred, anger, and crude remarks?"

If He would not; then why is Neal Hughes, who professes to be a Christian, doing this?

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 1_-_Great-Shepherd_Sheep_2d-R_FOLLOWER
A, My charity is none of your business, but when I have money I give generously of my dollars, and when little money of my sweat, time and education.

B, I would never blow my own sanctified horn the way that you do.

C, Your lot can't even begin to approach the R.C. and Anglican Church, the UMC, the ECLA and PCUSA and other mainline churches at the charity level for third world and second world countries, or for that matter the Aga Khan's various charities for the Islamic World.

D, If the truth don't hurt then why are you and Bill so defensive and barbed tongued?

Your hubris is your own downfall. Honey, the Khmer Rouge were sincere when they set up the killing fields. If you didn't post silly things then there would be nothing to expose, or as you call it "ridicule.".
quote:
Originally posted by CrustyMac:
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Gray:
quote:
Originally posted by CrustyMac: Amazing, Bill. Are there any mirrors in your house?

Hi Crusty,

You are always there to cast stones at anyone who professes Christ; how about you tell us YOUR view of Christianity and what you practice.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Bill, you profess, but you don't practice. Anyone who isn't a fundemental evangelical is subject to ridicule from you. I don't cast stones at everyone who professes Christ, just the self-righteous ones, and the literalists who are just plain crazy.

My relationship with God is none of your business, but just for your satisfaction, you wouldn't get it, and you would disapprove. But it is honest, which is more than I can say for yours.

Hi Crusty,

Please show me where I have ridiculed another Christian's beliefs. I may disagree -- but, in doing this I will show, from the Bible, why I disagree. With another Christian; I will agree to disagree; but, I will not allow it to divide us.

With atheists, I will also disagree and I will show them from the Bible why I disagree. However, this matters very little to them, for if they acknowledge the Bible they would have to acknowledge God. If they acknowledge God; then they would have to let Him have control over their lives -- and that is what they are working so hard to avoid.

Now, regarding your relationship with God. The apostle Paul teaches us in Romans 1:16, "For I am not ashamed of the Gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, . . ."

So, Crusty, if you have a relationship with Jesus Christ -- are you ashamed of it? Are you ashamed to tell us that you love and follow Jesus Christ?

Or, is what you seem to want to hide is the fact that -- you do not have a relationship with Jesus Christ; that you are not a Christ Follower?

Either way, I am not knocking you for your belief or lack of belief. However, I will go back to my original question: If you are not a Christian -- why are you always the first to jump into a discussion about Christianity? I can see why Deep, Fish, Miami, and a few others do. They are atheists and their religion is the total opposite of Christianity. Therefore, to acknowledge Jesus Christ they would have to disavow their own gods.

So, in a few words, why are you always the first to jump into a Christian discussion?

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 1_-_JOHN146-1d_WAY
quote:
Originally posted by nealmhughes:
A, My charity is none of your business, but when I have money I give generously of my dollars, and when little money of my sweat, time and education.

B, I would never blow my own sanctified horn the way that you do.

C, Your lot can't even begin to approach the R.C. and Anglican Church, the UMC, the ECLA and PCUSA and other mainline churches at the charity level for third world and second world countries, or for that matter the Aga Khan's various charities for the Islamic World.

D, If the truth don't hurt then why are you and Bill so defensive and barbed tongued?

Your hubris is your own downfall. Honey, the Khmer Rouge were sincere when they set up the killing fields. If you didn't post silly things then there would be nothing to expose, or as you call it "ridicule.".


Exactly...your works, your charity is none of anyone's business. And no one has asked you that before; yet you spew your venom asking others to show their fruit! Now isn't that a bit hypocritical? I am sure all Christians on this forum give generously to their churches, their favorite charities, etc. And no one has to prove their works to anyone.
We are not saved by works, but if a person really is a born-again Christian his works will show that he is a Christian. As Bill said, we have only seen you spew your venom at other Christians yet condone the lifestyle of sinners. You never say anything positive to other Christians, and when they relate something positive (like answered prayer) you immediately cut them down. Do you really think God is pleased with that?
Hi Monet,

No, Neal will not respond directly to your question. Just as he cannot respond to the simple questions I asked.

All he will do is to spew out a one page paragraph -- rambling on and on about nothing. Just like a politician; Neal can talk forever and never say anything -- unless he can aim his poison pen toward Christians.

Neal is much like the Gnostics of Jesus' day -- grand oratory and verbal intelligence while declaring, "What a wonderful person I am!"

Jesus does not ask for great oratory nor super intelligence; He asks for an open and loving heart, a heart which can, by grace through faith, receive His wonderful gift of salvation.

Neal is more like the used car salesman on his wedding night: all night he kept declaring how wonderful it was going to be -- but, he never delivered the goods. When it comes to Christian brotherhood; Neal never delivers the goods.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • Bible-Hole_NEAL
Since you wish to endow me with powers I neither have nor wish to have, let the Catechism of Creation of the Episcopal Church speak re: Biblical literalism in the Creation for your edification:

Link

I hope that suffices, it sounds like a perfect between faith, tradition (including scripture), and reason to me. Obviously that won't work for you, having the word "reason" in it.
quote:
Originally posted by nealmhughes:
Since you wish to endow me with powers I neither have nor wish to have, let the Catechism of Creation of the Episcopal Church speak re: Biblical literalism in the Creation for your edification:

Link

I hope that suffices, it sounds like a perfect between faith, tradition (including scripture), and reason to me. Obviously that won't work for you, having the word "reason" in it.

Hi Neal,

Still cannot speak for yourself? That is amazing, considering how you can write a ten page diatribe against other Christians and against the Bible. But, when I ask what you believe -- you cannot answer. Oh, well, so much for your faith.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill
My favorite "regular" song is 318: "Here O Lord, I See Thee Face to Face," which sums up Anglican Eucharistic theology very well:

"Here, O my Lord, I see thee face to face;
here would I touch and handle things unseen;
here grasp with firmer hand eternal grace,
and all my weariness upon thee lean.

This is the hour of banquet and of song;
this is the heavenly table spread for me;
here let me feast, and feasting, still prolong
the hallowed hour of fellowship with thee.

Here would I feed upon the Bread of God,
here drink with thee the royal Wine of heaven;
here would I lay aside each earthly load,
here taste afresh the calm of sin forgiven.

Mine is the sin, but thine the righteousness:
mine is the guilt, but thine the cleansing
here is my robe, my refuge, and my peace;
thy Blood, thy righteousness, O Lord my God!

Feast after feast thus comes and passes by;
yet, passing, points to the glad feast above,
giving sweet foretaste of the festal joy,
the Lamb's great bridal feast of bliss and
love."

Words: Horatius Bonar, 1855

I am sure that Bill would hate it: too Catholic, and Monette's various iterations would not be able to find the drum and electric guitar music for this hymn.
Hi Neal,

It would seem we have a "problem in communicating." I asked you to tell me in your own words what Neal Hughes believes -- and all I get are quotes a song written by another in 1855 -- or quotes from your Common Book of Prayers written in the 1500s.

Do your dead archbishops and song writers speak for you? Do your bishops have to speak for you? Have you no thoughts on God, Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, and salvation -- other than what your bishops program into your head?

It is a sad day when a person who professes to be a Christian -- cannot, in his own words, tell us what this means to him and how he came to saving faith in Jesus Christ. And, you wonder why I like the Baptists or the non-denominational churches? In those churches we are encouraged to read and understand the Bible ourselves -- not depend upon a church leader to tell us what it means.

The Bible was written -- from God -- to man, all men, common man; and written so that a common man with the desire to understand God's Word -- can find His plan for our lives within the pages of His Bible.

Neal, it is not the church's Bible; it is not the Pope's Bible; it is not the Archbishop's or bishop's Bible. It is every believer's Bible.

So, once again, I will ask you. How did Neal Hughes get saved; or is Neal Hughes saved?

Does Neal Hughes know for certain that he has eternal life? Does Neal Hughes know, beyond any doubt, that he has eternal salvation and WILL go to heaven?

If not, then, Neal, you and I need to be talking privately -- and seriously. You are always welcome to use my e-mail: billdory@pacbell.net

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 0_-_CROS_BIB-2_FAITH-1
Last edited by Bill Gray
Neal and Bill,
I had gone to church most of my life, was Baptized at age 13, but never understood what "born again" meant. I assumed since I believed in God and Jesus, had been baptized and was a member of a church, I was born-again. You can go to church all your life and never quite 'get it'. One night God gave me a dream (that I won't go in to) but He made me realize my life was hopeless without Him. When I called out to Him, he told me to begin reading the book of John. I blew the dust off the Bible and began reading. It was suddenly like a letter from God just for me. I read in Hebrews that if you had 'willfully' sinned there was no more hope. Which frightened me, because everyone sins wilfully; but I kept reading until in the book of James I read that even the devil and demons believe and tremble. I realized then that being 'born-again' was more than just believing in God and Jesus. It is a relationship, without Him our lives are incomplete and meaningless, but He is always standing in the shadows waiting for us to ask Him into our lives and hearts. Right there, I knelt in my bedroom and gave my life to Him. I felt a warmth pour over me and my life has never been the same. Not that my life has been perfect or without problems...but God has always been there to help me through everything and to give me peace no matter what is going on around me. No, you do not have to be in a church to give your heart to Jesus; you can do it anywhere, anytime.
Being born-again is something you will never understand until you have experienced it. And once you have, you wonder why you took so long and you realize all the good things God had for you that you were missing.
As far as the denomination of church, I really don't think that is important...if the church is a Bible believing Christ-centered church. I think it is wrong to bash other Christians and other denominations, even if they interpret certain parts of the Bible differently. Some people draw conclusions without ever reading the Bible. If the preacher says it, they believe it. But you should never put your whole trust into a preacher, or anyone else but God. You should test what they preach by what the Bible says, if they are quoting scripture correctly, etc. Some people fall in love with their pastor, then when he makes a mistake, they are crushed and some even leave the church and never return.
Read the Bible for yourself, praying, asking God for understanding, and He will help you. Give your life to Him and He will never disappoint you.
Bill, it is called "changing the topic," as you were getting a little obsessive-compulsive. Well, in my opinion, anyhow.

Am I "saved?" I am saved and reaffirm that every time I reaffirm my baptismal and confirmation vows, when I confess my belief in Jesus as the Son of God, God from God, Light from Light, and was made fully man and was both God and man at the same time, and who voluntarily took upon the sins of the world to pardon my sins. I am certain of that every Sunday when I recite the same, when I take His Blessed Body and Blood into my body for the guarantee of the love he shows to me constantly and for the forgiveness of my sins.
I get a warm fuzzy every time I stand up to recite the Creed or when I see the procession begin and the Cross pass by me...I think that is what you mean by "saved," isn't it, a feeling of your own inadequacy to do a thing without the help of Christ Jesus and that you must trust in Him and His Church for guidance and His Word and good example?
Who God "saved" is not for me to know, I know who God adds to the Church both visible and invisible and who go through at least the motions of confessing their sin and His Word, but I cannot claim to know how God in His Own good time and method shall deliver unto eternal life, for how can I a mere man know what is inside the hearts of men? Do you dare presume to know such things?
There is a way not to read what I read, don't read it.
I am stubborn, if an old man in California who has a history of not answering question asked him by others, then I find no need to answer his, which I find quite silly and rather pointless at times, reminding me of asking how many angels they think can dance on the head of a pin.
Your history of lying about things political and historical is repugnant, and claiming that you "didn't know," is scant excuse. You need to apologize and delete. You support fringe novel dogma which you state as fact. That is not true: most denominations do not teach either biblical literalism nor tribulation nor rapture as doctrine and you know it. It is not in any Creed of the Ancient Church Fathers, the direct successors of the Apostles who knew Our Lord personally. It has never been taught as doctrine by any of the branches of the apostolic church for a good reason: these are novel and not worthy of comment except as an exercise in debate, settled in the West by Aquinas who declared that the truth was universal and held no contradictions. The earth is round, anyone from space can witness this. The Classical scholars and the general public knew this in times of old, yet the Bible refers in the Old Testament to the "Four Corners" of the earth, which is either metaphor or literal. Science shows it is metaphor or else that the pre-Classical Hebraic tradition held that the earth was flat.
Likewise the Bible refers to Joshua commanding the sun to stand still. While it may have appeared to have still, this is predicated upon the ancient belief that the stars were close to the earth and small and all revolved (as they appear to do from the earth) around the earth. Copernicus and Kepler showed this was not true. The Church, both Protestant and Catholic said it was heresy. Until . . . they used Aquinas and said, "Oops. Maybe it is metaphor for the sun not appearing to move and not that the sun did not move. . . " a few centuries later.
Is the earth flat? Does the earth revolve around the sun? Is the world 6K years old when the Bible itself says that a thousand years is but a twinkle in God's eye? Why would a creator who made the world with two words, "Fiat lux!" end it with a system so convoluted and flatly odd that no two seem to agree on what exactly it means?
I take it you did not like the song. It's my favorite Communion hymn.
Hi Neal,

That is okay. If you cannot or prefer not to answer my questions, "How were you saved?" or "Are you saved" -- there is no problem.

I can tell you how I was saved: By the grace of God, through putting my faith in Jesus Christ -- He imputed His righteousness to me making me appear clean and whole to God the Father; while, in reality, I am still a filthy unrighteous sinner. Yet, His blood shed on the cross of Calvary covers me and imputes to me, or attributes to me, His righteousness. I am covered by His righteousness.

And, I received this beautiful, free gift -- only by grace through FAITH in Him -- plus nothing else. Check out Ephesians 2:8-9.

However, if you are not a Christian; why are you writing rambling diatribes and volumes in the Religion Forum -- knocking all Christians and the Bible?

Simple questions -- for most folks.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 0_-_CROS_BIB-2_FAITH-1
Bill, did the Metamucil factory burn down? You got an answer. Beat your dead horse all you like. It only makes you more silly than you usually are.
Seriously, to you have the attention span of a gnat and reading comprehension level of Koko the gorilla?
You and your camp followers are always correct in all things metaphysical and physical -- in your own eyes.
I thwart nothing other than superstition and bigotry and reactionary politics wrapped in the flag and bearing a Bible. If I cannot posit my opinions, then why can you? Fair play, old bean, fair play.
The truth can withstand anything. That which is truly sacred is eternal and neither my words nor those of anyone else can stop that.
I simply refute your dogma and expose the serious lack of intelligence and reason that you would have us adopt in your quest to be Vicar of Christ on Earth.
Well, you ain't, and you never will be if I can do anything about it. Yet, at the same time you are free to post whatever you like about whatever you like and use my name in your headlines. It doesn't bother me now at all.
In fact, I rather enjoy you singling out me and the Anglican Communion. I am flattered that you would make me Presiding Bishop or AB of C! Shocked, but flattered.
I try to follow the Enlightenment and the tenets of the orthodox catholic apostolic faith as I understand them, and nothing else.
You refute both. Oh well, c'est la vie et chacun a son gout.
Once again, I ask you, aren't there Scientologists in Cali for you to try to convert? Just ask them about Xenu . . . .
Hi Neal,

In other words -- Sorry, Bill, I cannot answer you. I do not know what it takes to be saved. Okay.

So, we just have to put up with your long, rambling, one long paragraph diatribes. But, please stay out of Deep's Atheist Cutesy Comments Manual. You just do not have the panache to pull it off.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 1_-_Lamb3a-TEXT-1
Bill asks what it takes to "be saved." I shudder at the possible answers he may and most probably shall in reply, but here goes my feeble attempt at how I understand salvation:

Admit you are a sinner, every day, in thougth mind, act, and that sin is when you replace what belongs to God with your own will.

Realize that you will always be a sinner. Can't help it, little thing called free will involved, the great gift of God to humanity, alongside art and a natural altruistic and gregarious nature.

Find out and realize that you are separated from God by sin.

Realize that the self-donation of God Himself in the Second Person of the Trinity, the Son is teh mediator between you and God.

Confess your faith in Jesus Christ as God from God, Light from Light, begoten not made, who was made flesh for we men and women and for our salvation, offered Himself as the final and all-appeasing sacrifice upon the Cross.

Be baptized for the inward washing of your sins in the physical act of washing of the body.

Follow the Good Example of Our Lord who in His infinite wisdom left His own words and examples for us to follow, as we are directed so to do.

Know that you, through faith and baptism are now a member of the Church, established by the Lord Himself on the Day of Pentecost after His cruxifiction and Glorious Resurrection and Ascension.

Practice the Apostolic Faith, which includes the gathering together on the First Day of the Week for public confession of both faith and sins, and sharing in the Bread and Wine, which through the power of the Holy Spirit and our faith, is the living Body and Blood of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, who freely stretched out His arms upon a cross, and was sacrificed for our sins and for our sake, and that this is the commeneration of memorial of this sacrifice and that it is indeed, a way for us to share in the grace of Our Lord in having been pardoned of our own sins and praised and glorified the Lord in praise and prayer and song, we dare to come to share His blessed Body and Blood that He may dwell in us and we in Him and be assured of our salvation.

Finally, live the life to which we are called in our baptism and confession of faith, that is to say, be a generation of royal priests, adopted children of God Almighty, and since God is Love, to spread love and not hate, to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to comfort the afflicted, to bind the wounds of our neighbor who is everyone, and let not our hearts be troubled, as The Lord God Almighty, will surely end the world in His own time and choosing, to concentrate on making ourselves visible icons of Christ and not in vanity of titles, rights to decree doctrine, or dogma that is not binding upon any Christian merely because someone claims it is when it is repugnant to common sense, holy scripture, and the apostolic holy catholic church's historic teachings as protected by the Holy Spirit in the church's role as appropriate and ultimate right-holder to define doctrine and interpret the Bible and other documents.

It does not involve any television watching or even clergy, ultimately, as it is the duty of each to personally and publically declare his or her faith in Jesus Christ as Savior, and as anyone may baptize when an emergency arises and no clergy is available and while the church attendance part is important, there are many who by location or infirmity or incarceraton and/or commitment to state nervous hospitals and such similiar institutions, are unable to worship communally.

Now that is my interpretation of the theology of salvation as I understand it, and should not be considered authoritative, as I read no Greek or Aramaic and stumble through Latin even with an exhaustive dictionary and grammar by my side.

Your turn, separated brother in Christ.
quote:
Originally posted by bubbaluck:
quote:
Originally posted by CrustyMac:
The Episcopal Church doesn't have Oh Come All Ye Faithful in it's hymnal? What is wrong with them?


WRONG! It is number 83 in the hymnal. Check again.


I didn't check the first time. I'll take your word for it. Episcopaleans now have my official seal of hymnal approval. Razzer
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Gray:
Hi Neal,

In other words -- Sorry, Bill, I cannot answer you. I do not know what it takes to be saved. Okay.

So, we just have to put up with your long, rambling, one long paragraph diatribes. But, please stay out of Deep's Atheist Cutesy Comments Manual. You just do not have the panache to pull it off.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill


I think we agreed this was about page 5 in the Fundy Play Book. When given an answer, ignore it and claim that no answer was given. Repeat as necessary.
No one says you were born to go to hell. God does not even say you were born to go to hell. You were born to fill a void in someone's life or perform a certain task in life. Whether it'd be your mommy, daddy, future wife or future kids... but ultimately you were born to have a relationship with God.

As a child; it is believed that you are kind of in this "state of innocence". Where you can do no wrong (intentionally) because of your fragile state of mind. You do not perceive right or wrong until taught. So that is when you have the "age of accountability" which remains with you the rest of your life. However with this said; if you study a child for a little while you will untimately see that they have ways of evil at a very early onset. A child will grab at shiney things (watches & rings) and when not given to them they will scream and cry because they did not get their way. This constitutes a sin known as GREED! Further more, if you watch two small children in a room with a bunch of toys you will see another self-enveloped sin of sorts; One child will show anger towards another child when they have a toy the other wants to play with. You will see one showing violence towards the other; according to the Holy Bible this is a sin as well. Are these learned behaviors; "SCIENCE" has proven otherwise. It has been proven that we are born with tendencies towards sin.

With all this said; we are not born to go to hell but in fact we will inevitably head that way if not for the teachings of our parents; which usually stem from the teachings of the Bible. At this juncture in life, we have been taught the correct ways to behave for so long that we forget that they were given by God from the beginning of time and we just attribute these lessons as just being lessons taught & learned.

We would have a destination for Hell due to a prolonged sinful life if it had not been for the Grace of God even from the beginning of time by teaching us through Israel's laws! Now we Christians don't have that care or worry even more so because Jesus was the ultimate propitiation & atonement to God for the sins of all men/women who believe in the name of the Lord! (John 3:16)

Good day.
Hell, a most interesting word. Germanic, of course, and a shorthand for various Persian, Semitic, and Greek concepts that involve an absence of the presence of both light and God.

In the ancient writings we quaintly term the "Old Testament," in the earliest writings purported we find not a concept of eternal punishment, rather a physical loss of blessing. Later in these same books we find imagry that suggest a place of separation from God, a place,not necessarily of eternal punishment, rather a dark place, "Outer Darkness," "Sheol," etc., more akin to the Hellenic concept of Hadess than an eternal toruture chamber.
Finally, after contact with the Persians, we find the Zoroastarian concept of the physical abandonment of God to the evil for a spiritual place, the concept of a final judgment is relized.
Then in the time of Our Lord, we find such a place for the dead termed "Gehenna," a garbage dump outside the city walls of Jerusalem, "pit," etc., where there shall be "wailing and the gnashing of teeth." Finally, in the visions of John of Patmos, we see something upon many have latched: a Dantesque Concentric Circles of Torment, minus only harpies and flying monkeys.
Now, one would imagine that those who tout the Johannine vision as literal would also have the common sense to have read the first part of the letter: John addresses it to seven churches in Asis. He is in a visionary state and Our Lord's voice tells him to take up a pen and write. He does and he starts to see a series of physical things: seven candlesticks and seven stars. Next, confused, Our Lord clarifies what he has seen, the seven candlesticks are the seven churches of Asia to whom John is to write. The seven stars represent the angels who guard each church.
Following this interpretation, Our Lord no longer directly addresses John, and the visions get progressively more odd and convoluted. He sees 144,000 elders, the City of God, streets of gold, and its opposite: the ultimate showdown between Our Lord and Satan. There are demons, seven-headed beasts with ten crowns, a woman clothed with the sun and crowned with stars, etc.
There is little else after this to mention until the imagry is adopted by the Medieval Church and used in its iconography. Then Dante in Florence abandons Vulgar Latin for Modern Tuscan and writes the Divine Comedy. This is about it until the rise of the "Darbyites" who invent rapture and tribulation in the early 19th Century. All calms down until Isaac Scofield publishes his reference Bible and still largely ignored, is rediscovered and grown to be beloved by various odd, heterodox sects, and even largely adopted by the ci divant sane sober Souther Baptist Convention's minister and given the unofficial nihil obstat.
What is hell? Who says what hell is? Many Orthodox Jews deny hell's existence, they claim that it is eternal loss of the soul: the soul dies. Their names are not written in the Book of Life and the are not resurrected.
Hellfire: scaring people into giving to their sacerdotal betters since at least 500 B.C.
It would be the absolute height of hubris, in my opinion, to dare presume how and when and where the Almighty whose property is always to show mercy might condemn the largest portion of dead mankind to an eternal dinner party of nasty food, punctuated with fingernails being pulled out, and Karl Marx having written a lot of new books that he decides to read aloud on the concept of worker alienation while John Hagee shows an eternal slide show as Sanjaya offers his "vocal stylings, a side and very loud argument simultaneously taking place between Lady Jane Grey and Mary I Tudor.
quote:
Originally posted by DeepFat:
Braylan,

That's nonsensical blather.

First, you say we are not born to go to hell, then you say we are. Which is it?

DF


No what I say is, is exactly what I said. We are not destined for Hell. God does not designate anyone for Hell. He created us to be followers of Him. Adam & Eve commited the first sin on earth, an since that time we have been born into the ways of sin. But you see God made a way for salvation. First it was through the laws of Adam, Abraham, Noah, & the Israelites. This was the fist way of salvation; the knowledge of salvation if you will. The final and inclusive of "the law" as well was through Jesus Christ. God does not designate anyone for Hell, you make that choice yourself.
Last edited by Braylan
Drat those sinful greedy babies! I thought that stuff went out of style with Cotton Mather's recanting of witchcraft trials -- too late for a score of women and a man, but at least he recanted, albeit on nearly his deathbed.

The anthropomorphic flying monkey who tricked Adam and Eve into eating of the forbidden made us heirs of their sin of forbidden fruit eating. I believe that this is a cop out and a mythic intrepetation of loss and and a Golden Age vice an actual historic event.

I am just informed that an anthropomorphic flying monkey is just silly, that the animal in question was actually the Biblically factual talking snake.

How in the world can an infant or even child sin when they have no concept of morality, of religious duty, and their superegos in Freudian terms, aka, "training" is not yet even in the process of formation?

Greedy babies! Indeed! People on islands for thousand of years with no contact with outsiders and therefore no knowledge of Noah, Jesus Christ or Adam condemned to eternal perdition -- repugnant to the Word of God, the Christian religon as taught and practiced as orthodox, and just good taste and common sense.

I'll take a greedy "sin baby" over this ridiculous claptrap any day of the week!

"Suffer the little children to come unto me."
Why? So they can be whipped for being greedy and looking at and reaching for bright shiny things?
Yes, I took the class in 1986 and was licensed then, and was also on the vestry for a 3 year term before I was 30 and elected to Annual Convention where we elected a new suffragan bishop, who is now the bishop of all Long Island, the largest in the USA in terms of membership, as it includes Brooklyn, Queens, and both Nassau and Suffolk Counties.
I fear I am too poor and notorious a sinner to become a deacon, though. But I can chant pretty good when necessary and know how to keep a censor lit: it's in the wrist and I taught many a lad and lass how to do it back in the day. I can drain that chalice with one swig, "in a dignified manner" as the rubric insists at both 8am and 10 am. The old ladies used to love it when I led Morning Prayer! The accent, you know.
Yeah, the deaf little old church ladies love southern accents on Lawn Guy Land for some reason or another. New Yorkers for some odd reason are always drawn to one.
Just like a nice Oxbridge accent will sound authorative, I reckon they think that is close enuff for church doin's. I think that is when you use "right" for a modifier and "reckon" for more than math in both dialects that does it.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×