Christian Traditions (posts split from Pagan Board)

[jeremyp]

The miracle was real.

Nah.

[bluehillside Retd.]

a-o,

You have to forget modern secular governments but yes, they are the result of the Reformation (or Deformation, as I call it) and things like Luther's two kingdom doctrines. The soul of Europe, however, is indeed Christian. Neither is Europe just Protestant of Catholic Europe or western. Large parts of it are Orthodox. If only Theodosius were to come back from the dead.

Europe has a "soul"?

Presumably you mean by that something like "much of European culture is influenced by Christianity", which is true. It's also true that much of European culture has been influenced by pre-Christian beliefs and by post-Christian beliefs. Why then pick one moment in time - ie, when Christianity was the predominant cultural influence - and determine that's the one true determinant of what Europe is?

[jeremyp]

You have to forget modern secular governments but yes, they are the result of the Reformation (or Deformation, as I call it) and things like Luther's two kingdom doctrines. The soul of Europe, however, is indeed Christian. Neither is Europe just Protestant of Catholic Europe or western. Large parts of it are Orthodox. If only Theodosius were to come back from the dead.

The soul of Europe is secular. If you look at the broad brush of history, Christian Europe will be seen to be a short theological interlude between the Greco-Roman period and the Enlightenment.

[Owlswing]

And you have to be the biggest tosser. So go away. I've never seen anyone with such a big chip on their shoulder and you really don't like anyone thinking that you're wrong. You're a joke (after all, you're a pagan) and everyone here knows it.

I have seen someone with a chip on his shoulder that is bigger than the entire cross of the criucifiction - you!

If you think my being pagan is a joke, you obvu=iously do not rrad the posts about yourself.

Go on, start a poll about who is the bigger joke, you or me. I will abide by the result, but would you? I doubt it!

[Jack Knave]

It is what happened.

You witnessed this yourself then?

[Jack Knave]

Not at all. You don't have to be a Christian to know the difference between a spell and a miracle. A spell is a form of words supposed to have magic power. A miracle is an effect or extraordinary event in the physical world that surpasses all known human or natural powers and is ascribed to a supernatural cause.

What are prayers but words aimed at achieving supernatural things.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The soul of Europe is secular. If you look at the broad brush of history, Christian Europe will be seen to be a short theological interlude between the Greco-Roman period and the Enlightenment.

If you look at history Christian Europe will be seen?

Sounds like fallacious wishing to me.

This is the dawning of the age of the neotenised numptie not mankind's forward march.

[ad_orientem]

What are prayers but words aimed at achieving supernatural things.

The difference is that the power is not in the words themselves, unlike a spell. With a miracle the supernatural event is the work of God alone.

[bluehillside Retd.]

a-o,

The difference is that the power is not in the words themselves, unlike a spell. With a miracle the supernatural event is the work of God alone.

Which makes a kind of sense I suppose provided you've decided that there is a "God" in the first place - it's basically the same argument the Polynesian islanders made about the supplications they made to appease their volcano god. Why though would a god who knows what's best and who wants to do it only decide to do the right think provided his adherents ask for it on their knees and in the approved manner?

[Rhiannon]

The difference is that the power is not in the words themselves, unlike a spell. With a miracle the supernatural event is the work of God alone.

Which means that you don't understand what witches believe about spells.

[Owlswing]

The difference is that the power is not in the words themselves, unlike a spell. With a miracle the supernatural event is the work of God alone.

Via Christ - our dieties work via the witch.

Of course the real difference is that witches don't claim to be supernatural beings.

[Hope]

Via Christ - our dieties work via the witch.

Which is another way the two differ; as you say 'our deites work via the witch' whereas the Christian deity works through his disciples - cutting out the middleman/woman.

Of course the real difference is that witches don't claim to be supernatural beings.

Nor do Christians.

[ad_orientem]

Via Christ - our dieties work via the witch.

Of course the real difference is that witches don't claim to be supernatural beings.

Christ is God.

[Shaker]

Christ is God.

No, you're thinking of Eric Clapton.

Easy mistake to make though - beard, etc.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Shakes,

No, you're thinking of Eric Clapton.

Easy mistake to make though - beard, etc.

Is Eric a dab hand at serving tapas to 5,000 fans too then?

[Shaker]

Shakes,

Is Eric a dab hand at serving tapas to 5,000 fans too then?

He moves in mysterious ways, man.

[Hope]

No, you're thinking of Eric Clapton.

You're entitled to your opinion, Shakes, but it helps to have some evidence to support that opinion. I also notice that, as you can't respond to the substance of the post, you have to create a red-herring.

[BeRational]

You're entitled to your opinion, Shakes, but it helps to have some evidence to support that opinion.

That never stopped you before!

[Hope]

That never stopped you before!

Sorry, I'd forgotten that you don't believe that documentation should be regarded as evidence, BR.

[floo]

You're entitled to your opinion, Shakes, but it helps to have some evidence to support that opinion. I also notice that, as you can't respond to the substance of the post, you have to create a red-herring.

That is a good one coming from you Hope, as you have no evidence to support your opinions on matters of faith!

[bluehillside Retd.]

Hope,

Sorry, I'd forgotten that you don't believe that documentation should be regarded as evidence, BR.

Hope balls up No. 5 - the straw man.

Of course "documentation" can be evidence. My driving licence for example is evidence that I have passed my driving test. A Harry Potter book on the other hand is not evidence that people can fly on broomsticks.

Your problem remains explaining why the bible should be considered more akin to the former than to the latter.

[Shaker]

You're entitled to your opinion, Shakes, but it helps to have some evidence to support that opinion.

As has already been pointed out ...

I also notice that, as you can't respond to the substance of the post, you have to create a red-herring.

There isn't any substance to the post in question. It's just the same old same old - more dreary, boring flat assertion unsupported by a scrap of evidence, of precisely the same kind we see here day in and day out.

[Shaker]

Sorry, I'd forgotten that you don't believe that documentation should be regarded as evidence, BR.

Still avoiding the documentation of Cronus eating his six children, I see.

As it happens I have documentation for my belief:

http://goo.gl/TYXjgH

[BeRational]

Sorry, I'd forgotten that you don't believe that documentation should be regarded as evidence, BR.

That's right. You do not understand logic or rational reasoning.

The document is evidence of what they believed, not of what actually happened.

[Humph Warden Bennett]

Still avoiding the documentation of Cronus eating his six children, I see.

As it happens I have documentation for my belief:

http://goo.gl/TYXjgH

Not to mention what he did to his dad.