The Religion/Spirituality Thread

[DieselDaisy]

3 minutes ago, soon said:

Anabaptists arent anti-fasting; we do fast. Sorry if I came across that way.  Just not at set times and not often as a collective.  Individual churches no doubt do have group fasting sometimes and may turn it into tradition.  People do fast because Jesus did it and taught it. 

In this case of Lent, theres a few reasons we dont fast.  One aspect is more to do with the non-liturgical perspective, I think.  'Everyday is Christmas and everyday is Easter.  Each one Holy.  Die to your sins each morning in a new baptism' kinda ethos.  People do often give stuff up for Lent.  Similar to our use of the Nicene creed; we dont deny its existence and use-value.  We choose to, or discern to opt in or out of Liturgical legalities.  We like to be in step with our siblings of other traditions a lot actually.

A liturgical cycle that dictates eating practices isnt from Christ so we feel no obligation.  Not something we oppose though either.  

But also Lent is itself a 'need' that is outside of Anabaptist thought.  We believe in the 'pure Christian state of being here on Earth.'  And in that seek to follow the Pauline teaching to confront and rebuke each other in a timely manner and in private.  If that doesnt solve it we bring in another.  And if needed another.  Then an Elder.  Then as a last recourse, the community.  So ideally there isnt things left unsaid until a certain time of year.  

Similarly in tradition we eat simply and live simply all the time.  Myself as an urban anabaptist, though simple enough in life style, arent a great example of that aspect of our way.

I should have said anti-fasting at Lent. I was referring to the Affair of the Sausages (1522) and Zwingli's response. 

[soon]

7 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

I should have said anti-fasting at Lent. I was referring to the Affair of the Sausages (1522) and Zwingli's response. 

What an interesting affair it sounds like indeed  I will look that up sometime.  

But the reasons I gave about Lent are ones you can trust, none-the-less.

Edited February 15, 2018 by soon

[soon]

Anyone who can relate to this or has witnessed this? 

[DieselDaisy]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affair_of_the_Sausages

[soon]

2 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affair_of_the_Sausages

Thanks for link.

That teaching doesnt disagree with us.  But it also doesnt speak to the full list of why Lenten Fasting isnt part of our disciplines.  To the best of my knowledge it doesnt inform our practice, besides that we agree in principle that scripture alone is sufficient.  Being non-liturgical and repenting always are more the centre of the non-practice.  

Simplicity, daily repentance, the maintenance of righteous relationships and communal support for those struggling in sin are practices that exist inside the belief in the possibility of the 'pure Christian state of being here on Earth, before the return.'   This is a major factor that define us as separate from Protestants.  Because not believing in this possibility is why Protestant thought includes the believe in "Two Kingdoms."  Anabaptists reject in full the idea of Two Kingdoms.

All that said, we do make fantastic sausages though. Even I own a sausage maker.

[DieselDaisy]

6 minutes ago, soon said:

Thanks for link.

That teaching doesnt disagree with us.  But it also doesnt speak to the full list of why Lenten Fasting isnt part of our disciplines.  To the best of my knowledge it doesnt inform our practice, besides that we agree in principle that scripture alone is sufficient.  Being non-liturgical and repenting always are more the centre of the non-practice.  

Simplicity, daily repentance, the maintenance of righteous relationships and communal support for those struggling in sin are practices that exist inside the belief in the possibility of the 'pure Christian state of being here on Earth, before the return.'   This is a major factor that define us as separate from Protestants.  Because not believing in this possibility is why Protestant thought includes the believe in "Two Kingdoms."  Anabaptists reject in full the idea of Two Kingdoms.

All that said, we do make fantastic sausages though. Even I own a sausage maker.

From my knowledge of Anabaptism, which is admittedly grounded in the 16th - 17th centuries (Reformation), they splintered into many different sectaries, Mennonites, Amish who were basically Mennonites who fled to North America, Church of Brethren. In fact,

It is an extraordinarily convoluted!

[soon]

34 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

From my knowledge of Anabaptism, which is admittedly grounded in the 16th - 17th centuries (Reformation), they splintered into many different sectaries, Mennonites, Amish who were basically Mennonites who fled to North America, Church of Brethren. In fact,

It is an extraordinarily convoluted!

We always had foundational disagreements with mainstream reformers.  They've only become more pronounced pointing out the two unique identities.  By 1534 it was well established as two distinct paths.

So convoluted and I kinda love it!  I was once at a Mennonite church that shared a parking lot with another Mennonite church.  Why you ask?  Because they were originally one church.  Half the congregation wanted female leadership and half didnt.  So, agreeing that scripture was vague on this subject due to Pauls flip flop, the church decided to use its existing land to simply make a church for each group.  This was an act of love - wanting everyone to be cared for spiritually.  But they didnt want to loose the community, so they share a parking lot so that they still see each other!  Now, both churches have female head pastors but still exist separately for other reasons.

Me and many other Millenials simply identifying as Anabaptist, rather then identifying with a sect, is seen as radical which means its well in keeping with the praxis of traditional sectarian anabaptism.

(There are both Amish and Mennonites in North america.  A lot.  The separations were based on when people immigrated and where from)

EDIT: that chart is missing some Anabaptists even, lol.  The Doukabours who I posted a video on for instance.

 

Edited February 15, 2018 by soon

[Iron MikeyJ]

Fasting again today, it's Friday!!!

[soon]

29 minutes ago, Iron MikeyJ said:

Fasting again today, it's Friday!!!

Im curious about your experience of fasting?  If you dont wanna share I understand.

I guess I mean, is it more of a spiritual practice or more of a religious function?  Or something else?

 

[Iron MikeyJ]

1 minute ago, soon said:

Im curious about your experience of fasting?  If you dont wanna share I understand.

I guess I mean, is it more of a spiritual practice or more of a religious function?  Or something else?

 

Do you agree that God exists outside of time?

[soon]

Just now, Iron MikeyJ said:

Do you agree that God exists outside of time?

Yes, to our minds.  I believe God exists with in time as well as outside of our time.

[HOOSIER GUNZ]

Laying off the red meat and satfats a little bit might help your ticker tick a little longer and stronger. No guarantees.  I've found whole foods are bette for me.

[soon]

8 minutes ago, HOOSIER GUNZ said:

Laying off the red meat and satfats a little bit might help your ticker tick a little longer and stronger. No guarantees.  I've found whole foods are bette for me.

Funny you should say that; Ive become aware that I need to cut back my read meat intake in the last 2 days.  And yet I had to finish my meatballs left overs so just finished another sub.  I added shredded lettuce and extra parsley to make it "healthier"

Other then too much red meat I am a very healthy eater.  Do you cook?

 

Edited February 16, 2018 by soon

[soon]

Sorry to all the boys and girls who had their hopes dashed over Valentines Day dinner:

 

[HOOSIER GUNZ]

I'm not much of a cook.  I can follow cooking instruction but I'm no chef.  Nuts, fruits n veggies, salads, whole wheat, water, exercise, and the best fucken guns n roses forum and members I know.  I love you guys, even if you piss on me from time to time.  Oh yeah, I live and love my guitar.

[DieselDaisy]

There is potentially a great comedy scene about Moses when he chucks the Ten Commandments and has to re-write them, a scene reminiscent of that Black Adder episode in which Baldwick burns the only manuscript of Johnson's dictionary and the two of them have to re-write the thing. Written as one would fake their mother's handwriting when penning a school sickness note. ''Do you think he'll (god) notice?''. 

 

[Iron MikeyJ]

50 minutes ago, soon said:

Yes, to our minds.  I believe God exists with in time as well as outside of our time.

Ok.

Now what I'm about to share with you is absolutely in line with Catholic beliefs, but unfortunatly many Catholics are not very informed of their own religion. So to MANY Catholics it really IS just something we do that they don't understand, which is unfortunate. But EVERY single tradition we observe IS biblically based, not just something that we "made up".

As for fasting during lent (and suffering as whole, on ANY scale). We believe that since Christ exists outside of time, he takes strength, love, joy, etc from those that do things FOR him, while he was on the cross. So as he is hanging there, feeling unbearable pain, he has the ability to see MY (and your) sacrifices for him right now. So even though my sacrifices are tiny compared to the sacrifices he made, he LOVES that we are willing to do such things for him. Which that doesn't just count during lent, but ALL the time. Lent is just a time to try harder for him, as is Advent (but many people don't really do much for Advent other than calanders). So yes, fasting DOES bring you closer to him, if you understand the purpose (but again, many Catholics dont). Which don't get me wrong, we don't believe that Christ is always just hanging on the cross (that's a common complaint I've heard from protestants "Christ isn't on the cross anymore" etc). To quote Ghostbusters "it's Gozer" "I thought Gozer was a man?" "IT'S whatever it wants to be." God IS very much the same. So he can be wherever and WHENEVER, whenever he wants to be. Since Christ IS God, he had the ability to look into the future (outside of time) and see the sacrifices of his followers. So to put it quite literally, we make these sacrifices for Christ on the cross, at THIS very moment. He can see them, he can feel them, and he loves them. 

As for Advent, my family celebrated Advent for the first time this past Christmas, and my wife and I VERY much felt God's love because of it. We could just "feel" that he really appreciated the effort we put in. So yes, I felt like it was a very spirutual activity, and Lent is even more so. 

That's why it really hurts me how misunderstood Catholisim really is. People like to harp on mistakes of years gone by, or misunderstanding THEY have, that they have never tried to really understand. Obviously priest failings (like in the other thread) really don't help matters. But you can't blame an entire religion for the sins of some of its members (which happens a lot to Catholics). 

Every single one of our traditions and practices is rooted in the bible (new AND old testiment) or came from the the VERY early church (1st, 2nd, and 3rd century Christianity). Part of my own spiritual journey has been discovering the "Why" Catholics do the things they do, and EVERY single thing has an answer that is impossible to argue, at least for me. It's like trying to argue with the Will of God. 

Edited February 16, 2018 by Iron MikeyJ

[DieselDaisy]

I have always queried how Catholicism could acquire and set forth such opulence and wealth, such high-renaissance brilliance and architectural magnificence, being that Christianity is centered around a poor carpenter from Nazareth - in fairness you could equally apply this to (High Church) Anglicanism, and even (to a lesser extent) Lutheranism. 

[Iron MikeyJ]

15 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

I have always queried how Catholicism could acquire and set forth such opulence and wealth, such high-renaissance brilliance and architectural magnificence, being that Christianity is centered around a poor carpenter from Nazareth - in fairness you could equally apply this to (High Church) Anglicanism, and even (to a lesser extent) Lutheranism. 

Ok, let's talk about that. I asked this very question once.

Catholisism has existed since the beginning, with the Apostiles. As such, were the first churches wealthy? No. Quite opposite, early Christians had to hide in catacombs and other similar places in order to practice their faith. Over time, Christianity became more accepted, and part of that became the building of Churches and Cathedrals. In those early days especially, building beautiful temples to worship in was quite common. Every ancient society built HUGE massive temples to worship in, so in a way, Catholisims just continued that tradition. Also, in just about every city in the world, one of the oldest building you will find will be the Catholic Church. So (from our perspective) it's more appropriate to worship in a building that was built to last a long time. Not that it's wrong to worship in an abandoned movie theater for example (which I know a couple of local churches that do that), but that building won't last over the years. 

Finally, as a Catholic we believe the Lord deserves the best from us, for him. Does the President have a nice house? Does the Governor? Does the Mayor? Shouldn't God have a nice house then? Same philosophy applies to dressing up for mass. Would you wear nice clothes to meet a governor or President? Doesn't God deserve the same if you can do it. If you can't afford such thing, than just being there is all you should do. But if you can, you should. "To those much is given, much is expected." 

Edited February 16, 2018 by Iron MikeyJ

[Iron MikeyJ]

As far as actual wealth of individual church members go, it's quite modest. Like my local priest makes like $ 30,000 per year. Which is decent I suppose, but he's not a millionaire, that's for sure. How much do Bishops or even the Pope make? I don't know, but I am willing to bet not nearly as much as people think. Also, I would like to add, most people don't realize how much money the Church gives to charities. I'm sure it's seven or eight digits per year donated to charities. 

[soon]

12 minutes ago, Iron MikeyJ said:

Ok.

Now what I'm about to share with you is absolutely in line with Catholic beliefs, but unfortunatly many Catholics are not very informed of their own religion. So to MANY Catholics it really IS just something we do that they don't understand, which is unfortunate. But EVERY single tradition we observe IS biblically based, not just something that we "made up".

As for fasting during lent (and suffering as whole, on ANY scale). We believe that since Christ exists outside of time, he takes strength, love, joy, etc from those that do things FOR him, while he was on the cross. So as he is hanging there, feeling unbearable pain, he has the ability to see MY (and your) sacrifices for him right now. So even though my sacrifices are tiny compared to the sacrifices he made, he LOVES that we are willing to do such things for him. Which that doesn't just count during lent, but ALL the time. Lent is just a time to try harder for him, as is Advent (but many people don't really do much for Advent other than calanders). So yes, fasting DOES bring you closer to him, if you understand the purpose (but again, many Catholics dont). Which don't get me wrong, we don't believe that Christ is always just hanging on the cross (that's a common complaint I've heard from protestants "Christ isn't on the cross anymore" etc). To quote Ghostbusters "it's Gozer" "I thought Gozer was a man?" "IT'S whatever it wants to be." God IS very much the same. So he can be wherever and WHENEVER, whenever he wants to be. Since Christ IS God, he had the ability to look into the future (outside of time) and see the sacrifices of his followers. So to put it quite literally, we make these sacrifices for Christ on the cross, at THIS very moment. He can see them, he can feel them, and he loves them. 

As for Advent, my family celebrated Advent for the first time this past Christmas, and my wife and I VERY much felt God's love because of it. We could just "feel" that he really appreciated the effort we put in. So yes, I felt like it was a very spirutual activity, and Lent is even more so. 

That's why it really hurts me how misunderstood Catholisim really is. People like to harp on mistakes of years gone by, or misunderstanding THEY have, that they have never tried to really understand. Obviously priest failings (like in the other thread) really don't help matters. But you can't blame an entire religion for the sins of some of its members (which happens a lot to Catholics). 

Every single one of our traditions and practices is rooted in the bible (new AND old testiment) or came from the the VERY early church (1st, 2nd, and 3rd century Christianity). Part of my own spiritual journey has been discovering the "Why" Catholics do the things they do, and EVERY single thing has an answer that is impossible to argue, at least for me. It's like trying to argue with the Will of God. 

TBH, Im tempted to Scripture test all these claims only because you have such a focus on their supposed roots in Scripture.  I will avoid that as much as possible though. Because I asked about your experience of fasting.

Im not sure how the "fully human" aspect of Jesus relates to the timeless God head.  'God made flesh' remained outside of time?  To me entering into the flesh is one and the same as entering into time.  The presence of the sun is what provides the conditions for creation to thrive.  Our orbits around the sun is time and time inevitably leads to the death of the flesh.  Its kinda the whole deal, no?

Thats a fascinating reasoning.  Helping Jesus think happy thoughts while he, in this reasoning; fully God, is tortured.  I dont understand why Jesus wouldn't think about his return and peace on Earth, oneness with God and Creation?  Not eating meat makes him happier?  Why didn't redeeming humanity make him happy, but living like vegetarians do year round does?

Anyways, not the answer Id expect from "whats your experience of fasting" but thats what makes this thread cool.

 

[soon]

10 minutes ago, Iron MikeyJ said:

Ok, let's talk about that. I asked this very question once.

Catholisism has existed since the beginning, with the Apostiles. As such, were the first churches wealthy? No. Quite opposite, early Christians had to hide in catacombs and other similar places in order to practice their faith. Over time, Christianity became more accepted, and part of that became the building of Churches and Cathedrals. In those early days especially, building beautiful temples to worship in was quite common. Every ancient society built HUGE massive temples to worship in, so in a way, Catholisims just continued that tradition. Also, in just about every city in the world, one of the oldest building you will find will be the Catholic Church. So (from our perspective) it's more appropriate to worship in a building that was built to last a long time. Not that it's wrong to worship in an abandoned movie theater for example (which I know a couple of local churches that do that), but that building won't last over the years. 

Finally, as a Catholic we believe the Lord deserves the best from us, for him. Does the President have a nice house? Does the Governor? Does the Mayor? Shouldn't God have a nice house then? Same philosophy applies to dressing up for mass. Would you wear nice clothes to meet a governor or President? Doesn't God deserve the same if you can do it. If you can't afford such thing, than just being there is all you should do. But if you can, you should. "To those much is given, much is expected." 

The Catholic church did not begin in the 1st century community.

Because the president has a nice house, so should God????  What does that even mean?  

[SoulMonster]

28 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

I don't think time really exists. I think time is an illusion and the illusion is matter being perceived as changing, whether it is or isn't.

Matter+Space=Perception of Time

@SoulMonster Is that a bullshit theory or is it possible? I know very little about science, it's just a notion I had so be gentle. Been thinking it for a while and sure I've mentioned it but I can't remember what was said so sorry if you've already answered this.
 

No idea 

[soon]

On (institutional) Christian charity:

 

[DieselDaisy]

11 minutes ago, Iron MikeyJ said:

Ok, let's talk about that. I asked this very question once.

Catholisism has existed since the beginning, with the Apostiles. As such, were the first churches wealthy? No. Quite opposite, early Christians had to hide in catacombs and other similar places in order to practice their faith. Over time, Christianity became more accepted, and part of that became the building of Churches and Cathedrals. In those early days especially, building beautiful temples to worship in was quite common. Every ancient society built HUGE massive temples to worship in, so in a way, Catholisims just continued that tradition.

Which would be contradictory with Christianity - most of those ancient societies were polytheistic. The Catholic Church appropriated pagan custom and rite; it has little in common with Christianity. Even the term pontiff was originally a pagan office, pontifex maximus, presiding over Jupiter. 

12 minutes ago, Iron MikeyJ said:

Also, in just about every city in the world, one of the oldest building you will find will be the Catholic Church. So (from our perspective) it's more appropriate to worship in a building that was built to last a long time. Not that it's wrong to worship in an abandoned movie theater for example (which I know a couple of local churches that do that), but that building won't last over the years. 

Yet we do have surviving examples of the earliest churches, many of which are humble. The Church of the Holy Sepulchre on Calvary/Golgotha, the most important church in Christendom, is dated 335, 

The oldest church in England, St Martin's, Canterbury, is 6th century,

One of the most interesting things about visiting Rome was dipping in-and-out of these ancient churches, most of which were of humble design externally at least.

26 minutes ago, Iron MikeyJ said:

Finally, as a Catholic we believe the Lord deserves the best from us, for him. Does the President have a nice house? Does the Governor? Does the Mayor? Shouldn't God have a nice house then? Same philosophy applies to dressing up for mass. Would you wear nice clothes to meet a governor or President? Doesn't God deserve the same if you can do it. If you can't afford such thing, than just being there is all you should do. But if you can, you should. "To those much is given, much is expected." 

I would not want my faith to remotely resemble the office of our woefully deficient temporal leaders!!