D
Dokimas
Guest
Which is worse: Not acknowledging a God given position of a person or giving to a person a title or acknowlegement that ONLY belongs to God?
- Status
S
staffsgt7
Guest
The second. Atheists don’t believe in a god, but some do indeed elevate people into what others would call a ‘godlike’ position, and that is just wrong. We have seen this with such people as Muhammed, Stalin and some other undesirables. Of course, the people will say they are not doing such a thing, but one only has to look at their behavior if someone bashes their god-man.
The first situation is a slight, and if the man has enough personal fortitude they will prove themselves as a leader rather than forcing someone to follow them.
Now, we must look at such people as Stalin and Muhammed. No one is still killing others in Stalin’s name, but they have been doing that since Muhammed’s time. The same with such people as Hitler who also elevated himself into a godlike position.
Most of the deaths incurred to the people, other than Muhammed, were done during that person’s lifetime. For Muhammed, the deaths are still being incurred. And it is due to his god-like status in islam even though they will deny it due to their ‘sin’ of shirk.
The first situation is a slight, and if the man has enough personal fortitude they will prove themselves as a leader rather than forcing someone to follow them.
Now, we must look at such people as Stalin and Muhammed. No one is still killing others in Stalin’s name, but they have been doing that since Muhammed’s time. The same with such people as Hitler who also elevated himself into a godlike position.
Most of the deaths incurred to the people, other than Muhammed, were done during that person’s lifetime. For Muhammed, the deaths are still being incurred. And it is due to his god-like status in islam even though they will deny it due to their ‘sin’ of shirk.
D
Dokimas
Guest
Interesting perspective. Thank you. BTW, I pretty much agree with you. It’s very dangerous to elevate people to godhood like positions. Don’t the N Koreans do the same with their leader?
S
staffsgt7
Guest
Yes, I think that most communist leaders do that, and the people just follow along. Much of it is out of fear, and there are too many that do it willingly, and carry out the god-man’s demands (killing, terror, etc).
Stalin went through and destroyed much Christian symbols and replaced it with his own likeness, and then the media helped him along.
Hitler did the same, and he even replaced (killed) many Protestant ministers and replaced them with his own men.
All of them control the media.
In Muhammed’s time, poets were the ‘media’ of his time. And he had a few poets killed, one was a young woman, and another was an old man. Muhammed wished they were dead, and his band of followers willingly carried out his wishes.
There are many similarities between all these men and also a few more such as Mao and Chavez and Castro.
I even see something similar going on in the USA, but it is a bit different. Our Congress is trying to shut up the media (anyone who disagrees with the ‘ruling party’ right now), and also give more control to Obama over the internet. I don’t know how that is going to play out, but we will see. It doesn’t bode well what they are doing though.
D
Dokimas
Guest
57 people looked at this thread. Is it a difficult question?
J
Joe_Kelley
Guest
I would suggest that the first is a sin of disobedience in violation of the Fourth Commandment. The second violates the First Commandment , rejects God and thus all the commandments. This is the sin of Satan and the ultimate sin.
The latter may be the unforgivable sin, since by rejecting God it closes the door to seeking forgiveness.
Just my :twocents:. I don’t have any source or citation for this.
S
StrawberryJam
Guest
Interesting reply.
How does one take the title of Vicar of Christ then?
I always wondered about that.
T
ThuriferAcolyte
Guest
Vicar of Christ is a man made title reflecting a God given position (In the Catholic view).
S
StrawberryJam
Guest
Did Christ ask for Peter to be called this?
T
ThuriferAcolyte
Guest
Read what I said again.
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
Yes.
I’ve got one for you:
Paper or plastic?
Just joshing. It is thought provoking but I can’t make decide.
T
ThuriferAcolyte
Guest
The second is worse in my opinion, and I think reflects Catholic thought (idolatry is worse).
4
4EverHis
Guest
D
Dokimas
Guest
B
Bob_Crowley
Guest
It will depend on the context. Abortion, which is rampant in the West, and in many parts of the world, is an example of the first. The right of the unborn child to live, granted by God, is not acknowledged. Compared to that, I don’t know that calling some clown like Kim Jong II “Father of the People” is any worse.
I think it’s a case of situational ethics. Both are wrong. But since there would be a number of different situations in each category, some more serious than others, it would be impossible to make a blanket judgment.
J
Joe_Kelley
Guest
How does this constitute* giving to a person a title or acknowlegement that ONLY belongs to God?*
T
ThuriferAcolyte
Guest
HAHA yeah, I said that it’s a man made title reflecting a God given position, then he/she asked if Christ ask for Peter to be called this.
Slower reading helps sometimes.
P
PaulDupre
Guest
Exactly. God is nobody’s vicar. God is God. The word “vicar”, meaning a representitive or deputy, necessarily means something far less than God. The pope is Christ’s servant, as Eliakim was the servant of the king in Isaiah 22, but the king gave Eliakim “the keys to the kingdom” as Jesus gave His keys to His servant Peter:
Note that it says that Eliakim will be a* father *(papa or pope) to the house of Judah.
As you know, the parallel New Testament passage is this:
I always enjoy your posts, Joe.
God bless,
Paul
S
StrawberryJam
Guest
So, you are saying a substitute for Christ can be had, and you are saying this title came from someone who was not Christ. So, Christ did not feel the need to have Peter called this, but somehow it cropped up.
When did the title come about?
When did the title come about?
- Status