There's no such thing as a true Christian, because if you ask all Christians about what other denominations believe, they'll tell you that they're not true Christians. For example, ask Protestants about Catholics, and ask Catholics about Protestants.

(April 21, 2011 at 11:30 pm)Doubting Thomas Wrote: There's no such thing as a true Christian, because if you ask all Christians about what other denominations believe, they'll tell you that they're not true Christians. For example, ask Protestants about Catholics, and ask Catholics about Protestants.

I'm a Southern Baptist and I know many Catholics that are saved and most of my fellow Baptist would agree.

rev.J the word follow does not mean you must do, it means that it is possible.

(April 21, 2011 at 9:01 pm)padraic Wrote: I find it fascinating that believers and skeptics alike can read books as contradictory as the Bible and the Qur'an,and claim to understand
what they 'really' mean.

There are hundreds of sects within those faiths,each sect claiming some unique transcendent truth. Adherents to different sects have been killing each other for centuries over differences in interpretation.

It seems clear to me that works called "revealed truths" are anything but clear and unambiguous. If they were,surely there would be little if any disagreement?

I think it can also be argued that a god giving instructions would be clear and precise. That the books are not is any another fairly strong indication they were written by a bunch of fairly ordinary,and sometimes deluded* blokes. They reflect their times. (I won't even start on the howlers about Science)

*EG In my opinion,the writers known as John of Patmos were either clinically insane or under the influence of some hallucinogen when they wrote The Book Of Revelations.

Im 100% with Pad on this one. It doesn't matter what it says - 500 different groups are going to claim it means 500 different things. It's a joke that will just keep cycling until ALL of humanity finally grows the fuck up and realizes what a huge waste of effort it all was.

(April 22, 2011 at 12:54 am)Godschild Wrote: I'm a Southern Baptist and I know many Catholics that are saved and most of my fellow Baptist would agree.

rev.J the word follow does not mean you must do, it means that it is possible.

Some?

Why not "All"?

(April 21, 2011 at 5:10 pm)Watson Wrote:

Quote:#4 - You will speak "with new tongues"

What is meant here by 'tongues'? I must admit that, since becoming a Christian again, my manner of speaking has changed quite drastically. Maybe that's what is meant here.

You could call it a gift of 1. making yourself understood generally, 2. to be understood by people who's language you don't speak, or 3. glossailia: fluid vocalizing of speech like sounds.

(April 21, 2011 at 11:12 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote: Of course, that said, it is believed that the original version of Mark 16 ended at verse eight, and that the next twelve verses were later additions.

Indeed - the earliest manuscripts we have don't include Mark 16:9-20, the language is thoroughly non-Markan, and it would be very strange for the gospel to end at verse 8. Most likely, the end of the scroll was simply lost (this was a common problem, because of the way scrolls were made - in fact, there are a number of important variants at the beginning of Mark's gospel too).

(April 22, 2011 at 2:36 am)Zen Badger Wrote:

(April 22, 2011 at 12:54 am)Godschild Wrote: I'm a Southern Baptist and I know many Catholics that are saved and most of my fellow Baptist would agree.

rev.J the word follow does not mean you must do, it means that it is possible.

Some?

Why not "All"?

Because I know there are Southern Baptists that believe they are saved yet they are as lost as last years Easter eggs. Going to church does not save a person, as for the Catholics I believe the leadership to be the ones who are lost, not all but many, ie. the priest that rape innocent boys. As far as I'm concerned these men should never ever see the outside of prison.

But Christians dont follow logic...so in their minds all of them are true Christians...

(April 22, 2011 at 10:15 am)Godschild Wrote: Because I know there are Southern Baptists that believe they are saved yet they are as lost as last years Easter eggs. Going to church does not save a person, as for the Catholics I believe the leadership to be the ones who are lost, not all but many, ie. the priest that rape innocent boys. As far as I'm concerned these men should never ever see the outside of prison.

You are implying that YOU know what it takes to be saved, but that certain Southern Baptists do not not have this knowledge. They're obviously not true Christians, right?

As far as you're concerned, priests who rape innocent boys should never see the outside of prison, as long as they are alive. But don't you also believe that if while they are in prison, they "truly repent" of their "sins" and accept Jesus into their hearts, they will get to spend all eternity in the utopia of heaven? On the other hand, should a man who never committed a crime against his fellow men and lived a peaceful law-abiding life, but was never convinced to believe in your god, have to spend eternity in the fiery pits of hell, as far as you're concerned?

Quote:I'm a Southern Baptist and I know many Catholics that are saved and most of my fellow Baptist would agree.

But what about Catholic doctrine? You say "many" Catholics are "saved," yet you apparently don't believe that they all are. But let's forget about whether they're "good" or "bad" Catholics or Baptists. Would you say that a person who follows Catholic doctrine to the letter is a true Christian? And do you think that Catholics think that Baptists like yourself are going to heaven even though you eat meat on Fridays during Lent and have never experienced the sacrament of confession?