P
PRmerger
Guest
Shame on you, 1beleevr.Sounds rather traumatic; did you need any counseling?
I expected much better than this from you.
Shame on you, 1beleevr.Sounds rather traumatic; did you need any counseling?
Quick… here comes a bus… throw her under!Shame on you, 1beleevr.
I expected much better than this from you.
but she said" i do believe in the first and the third and believe those are a must but i dont believe in a virgin birth so would yoou then have it that i could not be a christian ?"she accepts the virgin birth.
sorry for taking so long to back here.but she said" i do believe in the first and the third and believe those are a must but i dont believe in a virgin birth so would yoou then have it that i could not be a christian ?"
The Church from the earliest time linked his divinity and and the virgin birth, and in not such a way as to make him a demi-God like Heracles. Not sure you meant to use the word “influences,” because the God of the Jews did not “influence” people. Maybe you can restate this by using the Christian term “grace.” or maybe “revelation.” Off hand it seems that you think of him as a kind of prophet/charismatic leader.sorry for taking so long to back here.
i dont believe jesus was born of a vigin in a physical sense. to create a life it needs two human influences and as such i see it that in a physical and worldly way jesus was son of joseph but was son of god in the way of his soul. in other words that he would have had the physical attributes of his earthly father but due to gods influencess he was more than just a person in ways that matter far more than the physical.
ok from the conception god made the soul of jesus not one of a man but of god.The Church from the earliest time linked his divinity and and the virgin birth, and in not such a way as to make him a demi-God like Heracles. Not sure you meant to use the word “influences,” because the God of the Jews did not “influence” people. Maybe you can restate this by using the Christian term “grace.” or maybe “revelation.” Off hand it seems that you think of him as a kind of prophet/charismatic leader.
Tweetymom,Who said that I do not pray with other people? I like alone time with God don’t you? I do not have a problemo:thumbsup:
Yes, Virgin Mary is gathered with us all she is our Mother! Party line a gathering call it what you will.So when you are say, praying to Mary, she is gathered with you? I always thought of it more as a party line [(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_line_(telephony)]((http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_line_(telephony))
) than a gathering.
Do you believe God created the universe? the miracles of Jesus? why believe part of the Bible and not the rest? Why did Joseph consider divorce? Ive heard there are professing Christians who dont believe in the virgin birth but Ive never met one and I ve always wondered these things.sorry for taking so long to back here.
i dont believe jesus was born of a vigin in a physical sense. to create a life it needs two human influences and as such i see it that in a physical and worldly way jesus was son of joseph but was son of god in the way of his soul. in other words that he would have had the physical attributes of his earthly father but due to gods influencess he was more than just a person in ways that matter far more than the physical.
yeah and NOT God.The Church from the earliest time linked his divinity and and the virgin birth, and in not such a way as to make him a demi-God like Heracles. Not sure you meant to use the word “influences,” because the God of the Jews did not “influence” people. Maybe you can restate this by using the Christian term “grace.” or maybe “revelation.” Off hand it seems that you think of him as a kind of prophet/charismatic leader.
So, aussie, where do you get this doctrine that Jesus was not born of a virgin in a physical sense? Is it from Scripture?sorry for taking so long to back here.
i dont believe jesus was born of a vigin in a physical sense. to create a life it needs two human influences and as such i see it that in a physical and worldly way jesus was son of joseph but was son of god in the way of his soul. in other words that he would have had the physical attributes of his earthly father but due to gods influencess he was more than just a person in ways that matter far more than the physical.
Completely disagree. If they are Christian, they have a rightful place. If they are not, they don’t belong.Again, the fact that I do not consider them to be Christians is irrelevant. They’ve read the Bible and have come up with their doctrines regarding Jesus; they are an organized aggregate of worship centers or congregations of similar ecclesiastical tradition and thus have a rightful place in that obscene 40,000 list.
Heck, even their name has Jesus in it!![]()
You are indeed free to disagree with me on this, as the CC has no official teaching about whether Mormons can be cited as part of the 40,0000 Christian denominations on that website.Completely disagree. If they are Christian, they have a rightful place. If they are not, they don’t belong.
Not sure what the relevancy of this is.But then maybe Jack Chick has a point in his little comics. We have so much in common with Pagan religions that clearly, Catholics must be pagan![]()
Jack Chick can insist the validity of anything he wants, but it doesn’t make it true.Not sure what the relevancy of this is.![]()
Agreed.Jack Chick can insist the validity of anything he wants, but it doesn’t make it true.
Hurtful? No, I’m sorry, but I don’t see how putting Mormons on the list of 40,000 Christian denominations hurts anyone’s feelings.But whether or not you can “validly” argue they can be included on the list, can’t you see how hurtful it is to those who are Christian that you “validly” lump them together with people who are not even Christian?
Respectfully,
Maria
It is not putting them on the list per se that is hurtful. It is your insistence that they were as “valid” as any other Church on the list.Agreed.
Hurtful? No, I’m sorry, but I don’t see how putting Mormons on the list of 40,000 Christian denominations hurts anyone’s feelings.![]()
No, that is not what I meant. I do consider Protestants Christians, if they have been baptized in water in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.It is not putting them on the list per se that is hurtful. It is your insistence that they were as “valid” as any other Church on the list.
And if non-Christians belong on a list of Protestant churches, what does that say of what you think about them being Christian? It can imply that if Mormons, who are not Christians, belong on a Protestant list of denominations, that you don’t think Protestants are Christians.
That may not be what you meant.
Is this what is taught in the non-denominational church that you attend, or is it just a personal opinion of your own?sorry for taking so long to back here.
i dont believe jesus was born of a vigin in a physical sense. to create a life it needs two human influences and as such i see it that in a physical and worldly way jesus was son of joseph but was son of god in the way of his soul. in other words that he would have had the physical attributes of his earthly father but due to gods influencess he was more than just a person in ways that matter far more than the physical.
In the Book of John, didn’t Jesus say, I am going to awake Lazarus from his sleep?No, that is not what I meant. I do consider Protestants Christians, if they have been baptized in water in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
However, I make no distinctions between Mormons being closer to the truths of Christ than, say, Seventh Day Adventists who believe in the non-Christian doctrine of “soul sleep”. Why would Seventh Day Adventists belong on this list but Mormons don’t? Soul Sleep is just as non-Christian, IMHO, as the Mormon doctrine of Jesus’ “divinity”.