usual suspect wrote:

> degeneRat wrote:
> <...>
>
>>>> and I think Biblical
>>>> literalism is very similar to the Pharisees' idolatry of the Law --
>>
>>
>>> You can "think" whatever you want, but you need to deal with two
>>> aspects of Scripture, the Law and the Gospel, to understand. Consider
>>> the following article written by Michael Horton, a Reformed scholar,
>>> for a quick synopsis of the issue. And since you're so caught up on
>>> academic credentials, he has a doctorate from Oxford and he's a
>>> professor at Westminster Theological Seminary.
>>> http://snipurl.com/4er3
>>
>>
>> I'll read it later. I don't necessarily accept the teachings of
>> Protestants.

Karen doesn't accept all kinds of things she finds
inconvenient. She's a cafeteria Christian.

>
>
> From Grace Cathedral (SF) Episcopal Church's website:
>
> So... What, exactly, is Anglicanism?
> The Anglican Church is both Protestant and Catholic; it retains
> the organizational structure of the Roman Catholic tradition and
> incorporates theological insights of the Protestant reformation.
> http://www.20s30satgracecathedral.org/links.htm
>
> IOW, your church is Protestant in teaching (substance) and Romanist in
> hierarchy (form).
>
> From another Episcopal Church's FAQ:
> Q: What is the difference between the Episcopal and the Roman
> Catholic Churches? The Episcopal service seems very similar to
> the Roman Catholic Mass.
>
> So does my church's liturgy; so much so that one of my RC ex-girlfriends
> had no problem attending our services.
>
> A: They are similar. Some parts, in fact, are identical. We,
> however, are part of the worldwide Anglican Communion – the
> group of Churches that are "in communion" with the Church of
> England. We have some doctrinal differences with the Roman
> Church
>
> That should read "MANY doctrinal differences," but again it's a matter
> of form as noted next:
>
> – and, in places, we have differing interpretations of
> Christ's moral teachings.
>
> You can say that again. And again. And again. And again...
>
> But, in our basic structure, order,
> liturgy and spititual life, we are indeed very similar to the
> Roman Catholic Church.
>
> Yes, in the more outward vestiges of liturgy and hierarchy; some
> Reformed churches are also high church, but style isn't what the
> Reformation was about. Even some Lutheran denominations like ELCA
> maintain a bishop-oriented hierarchy, though it's a matter of adiaphora
> -- neither commanded nor forbidden -- for good order in the church.
>
>>> Your church, like others from the Reformed tradition
>>
>>
>> Our tradition is Catholic, Anglo-Catholic. We broke away on an
>> issue of Church government, not Catholic doctrine,
>
>
> Yes, you did. My church claims to be catholic as well, and we are. You
> differ tremendously over the following Roman Catholic doctrines:
>
> * female ordination
> * contraception and abortion
> * papal infallibility
> * perpetual virginity of Mary
> * immaculate conception of Mary
> * assumption of Mary
>
> There are many more.
>
>> like the Protestant sects.
>
>
> Ipse dixit. Check with your priest or even your denomination's website.
>
> <snip>
>
>>>> a concept which was condemned by both Christ and Paul. The important
>>>> thing is to open ourselves to God's presence and respond to it.
>>
>>
>>> Where do you find God or know what his will is?
>>
>>
>> A good question, and one we all have to search out.
>
>
> Where do you start?
>
> <snip>
>
>>> The good priests will tell you to look in the Bible to find the real
>>> Christ.
>>
>>
>> No, that's part of the problem. Our priest was asking last week who we
>> thought Jesus was. Everyone gave descriptions in the past tense. Our
>> priest stressed that Jesus is not a dead historical figure; He is a
>> living presence in the present, most visible in our actions toward our
>> fellow creatures, human and non-human.
>
>
> If I were to look in your face, I would find an AR misanthrope, a
> homosexual activist, a mother who did not raise her own son, someone who
> chooses to live with someone who *hates* babies and children, etc.
>
> I would not see the one who lived a perfect life in my place, suffered
> and died for my sins, and was raised again for my justification. That
> Christ still lives and is seated at the right hand of the Father to make
> intercession for me and for you. He is not a spiritual "presence" whose
> grunt work is carried out in leftwing political activism.
>
> <snip>
>
>>> Yes, the "growth" that has torn apart the American church, ripped the
>>> fellowship between the American church and all the other Anglican
>>> bodies, and halted dialogue with other denominations. I don't exactly
>>> see any of that as positive development.
>>
>>
>> Nor do I. It's sad when rigid legalism
>
>
> I don't call their charitable efforts to discuss the matter "rigid
> legalism." I do call the uncharitable and radical moves away from
> Scripture and tradition, and away from good order in the church, schism.
>
>> and lack of charity split the church.
>
>
> I agree it was a lack of charity that caused the schism, I just disagree
> with you which side showed the lack of charity.
>
>> As I said, it's not the liberals who are splitting
>> the church
>
>
> Yes, it's the radicals who want homosexual bishops who are causing
> schism and division.
>
>> and threatening schism; it's the conservatives who are
>> leaving and setting up their own new denomination.
>
>
> They've no choice now that the apostacy has occurred. Guess who'll have
> fellowship with the other Anglican bodies and resume dialogues with the
> Roman Catholics and other churches.
>
> <...>
>
>>> Lifestyle meaning "vegan", AR, and homosexual, or even considering
>>> each individually. One is not unclean or defiled by what he eats.
>>
>>
>> Oh -- only YOUR definitions of lifestyle. I see....
>
>
> No, the one in the context of this discussion.
>
> <snip>
>
>>>>> No. The Bible is not a manual for leftist thought. It's also not a
>>>>> manual for right-wing thought, either. It is about man's
>>>>> relationship with God: how it went awry, how it was put back
>>>>> together. To draw or create *politics* from it -- ON EITHER SIDE --
>>>>> misses its real meaning and makes a mockery of its substance, which
>>>>> is Christ.
>>
>>
>>>> If you
>>
>>
>>> *I* do, you pompous and disingenuous nag. Geez. :-p
>
>
> The *least* you could do is apologize for being so uncharitable.
>
>>>> and the other right-wing fundies would really understand that,
>>
>>
>>> I can only speak and act for myself. I do not have any control over
>>> anybody else. That includes a whole list of people whose words I
>>> dislike as much as you do, but you've yet to cease the comparisons or
>>> falsely aligning me with them.
>>
>>
>>>> perhaps we could have a real, honest dialog.
>>
>>
>>> I've tried with you and all you do is snip and accuse me of being
>>> Fred Phelps. Are you capable of honest dialogue?
>>
>>
>> Yes, with people who show they are willing to have one and treat other
>> Christians with charity and respect. That lets you out.
>
>
> Then why do you even bother replying?
>
> <snip>
>
>>>> I wish you could meet him and talk with him.
>>
>>
>>> I'd set him straight.
>>
>>
>> You think you know more about me than my priest --
>
>
> I don't know what your priest knows about you, I only know what you've
> told these newsgroups.
>
>> or
>> understand better what being a Christian means?
>
>
> You can't even tell me where to find God or learn his will. You offer
> Christianity as though it's AR and homosexual activism. I don't think it
> is. I think those are tangential issues which Christianity can address,
> but they are so far from the center of Christianity's reality that
> they're unimportant.
>
>> Fine --
>> do what you want, believe what you want, I have no quarrel
>> with that. But my priest is my priest, and if I want
>> spiritual direction, I'll go to him, not you.
>
>
> That's as it should be, but my beef with your choice of priests is that
> he's not giving you the full counsel of God's word. I already know you
> don't care about the full counsel for various reasons. So long as you
> offer your opinions as statements of fact, I will (a) clarify what the
> Bible actually says about those things and (b) state the historical
> perspective (novelty, etc) of what you opine.
>
> Homosexual and AR activism both are antithetical to the Bible and both
> are historical novelties. Your positions about homosexuality being an
> orientation are not supported by Scripture, history, or science, but
> rather by modern sociologists with political agendas.
>
>> Jon Ball, Mercer, and you other Antis taught me one very
>> good lesson -- that none of us can become perfect through
>> our own efforts.
>
>
> See? You could've read St Paul and learned that. Would've saved you a
> lot of effort.
>
>> We do what we can, accept it will never be
>> enough, and put the rest in God's hands.
>
>
> Actually, if you read St Paul and Christ, we have to put it ALL in God's
> hands.
>
>> It was a hard
>> lesson, but a valuable one. They also taught me one other
>> good lesson -- NEVER show weakness. I opened my heart
>> and discussed my spiritual crisis on this newsgroup once,
>> and jonnie still brings it up as a triumph of the Antis and
>> my "nervous breakdown."
>
>
> If it's the one he shared at TPA/AAEV the other day, how was that a
> *spiritual* crisis? Sounds like reality set in on one of those
> tangential issues.
>
>> If I ever DID change my mind on
>> anything, or have any doubts about my actions, you can be
>> DAMN sure I'd never admit it again here.
>
>
> Why not? I admitted my errors. Of course, that meant the vegans didn't
> like me anymore, but that was after they showed their true colors (red,
> pink, yellow).
>
>> You are not honest searchers after truth
>
>
> I'm honest and I do search after truth.
>
>> and fellow Christians with concern
>> for animals and our ethical obligations toward them.
>
>
> I care about animals. I feed and take care of feral cats. I also have my
> own little menagerie in here. That doesn't change the fact that AR isn't
> about Christianity and Christianity isn't about AR. My anti-AR views
> don't make me any less Christian, and my Christian faith doesn't incline
> me to the same AR position you hold: quite the contrary for reasons
> given in texts you snipped two messages ago.
>
>> You
>> are a bunch of vicious hyenas waiting to leap on any sign
>> of weakness.
>
>
> Take a good look at that sidekick of yours. There's your vicious hyena:
>
> Do I hate kids? Yes!
> -- Swan, Date: 2000/04/09
> http://tinyurl.com/2f3wx
>
> Hate the very social structure that created me? Oh,
> Fertilla, you don't KNOW the homicidal fury that writhes within
> my form like a rotting pestilential tumor crying for its
> freedom! When I think back... when I ALLOW myself to think back
> to the pastel stucco houses, each with a tricycle or a swingset
> in the yard and a Cocker Spaniel or maybe a kitty named Mister
> Fluff, I want to scream. No, I want to do worse than that... I
> want to tear down those prim little houses, each festering in
> its own self-assured vileness! I want to firebomb the Chevy
> Suburbans, and **** a swastika into every dichondra infested
> lawn! I want to grab Ward Cleaver by his ****ing GONADS and rip
> his belly oepn to expose the wretched vomiting hypocrisy that
> fills him like gas fills a dead wildebeest in the African sun.
> I want to smash the windows to let in the wind and maybe
> dissipate the stench of June Cleaver's rotting viviparous
> snatch! Then I want to visit their neighbors, Ozzie and
> Harriet. Maybe I'll catch JUne and Harriet in a squirming
> ******* love-fest, if either of them can stand the stretched-out
> stench of their babyslots! Maybe we'll get lucky and see Ricky
> buggering the Beav with eight inches of steel hard social
> frustration screaming "I'll SHOW you whay they call you 'Beaver'
> you little faggot!"
>
> ....You want bitter ****s, Smurfetta, you GOT 'em! Bitter? Try
> so ****ing disgusted at a society that worships people in exact
> inverse ratio to their age! The egg os holier than the soaked
> Kotex, the zygote is better than the egg, but after that, it's
> ALL DOWNHILL, Baby! Praise the sacred ****ing FETUS, worry about
> the CHILLLLdrunnnn, but **** the adult, and SHITSCREW the poor
> senior citizen worthless pile of flesh that he is! **** Granny,
> but SAVE the bayyyybeeeee!
>
> Consider me the retroactive ABORTION rotting in you living room!
> You'll NEVER get me out of your carpet, no matter HOW hard you
> try! I ****ing BATHE in PetFresh and Febreeze and my rage STILL
> stinks to the high heavens, because when you get a whiff of ME
> you're smelling YOU! I AM YOUR BOIL lanced and splattered over
> your Sunday picnic!
>
> Get this loud and get this clear, I HATE CHILDREN. I hate YOUR
> children, I hate THEIR children, I hate every shitstain, every
> whine, squeal, drool, dribble and quiver of the little maggotty
> flesh loaves, ARE WE CLEAR ON THAT?!
> -- Swan, Date: 2000/02/12
> http://snipurl.com/4ae8
>
> I don't see what anyone could ever see in her.
>
>> I know you now, and I will never trust
>> any of you in discussing serious issues ever again.
>
>
> That's your loss, not mine.
>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>> Our unfallen state -- whether as myth or reality -- presents an
>>>> image of what we should be.
>>
>>
>>> Ipse dixit, and you're a Pharisee if you practice and teach such things.
>>
>>
>> How so?
>
>
> As I've noted several times now, you set up a paradigm of AR and
> veganism and judge others on it. IOW, you judge a man by what he puts in
> his mouth rather than what comes out of it -- going against Christ's
> teaching -- and you judge others on the basis of meat and drink -- going
> against St Paul's teaching. You are a legalist and a Pharisee, albeit
> one whose standards are set by caprice (it isn't the Holy Spirit) rather
> than Scripture.
>
> <snip>
>
>>> The spirit guiding you and your church isn't God.
>>
>>
>> Ipse dixit.
>
>
> This has already been demonstrated by all the stuff you keep snipping. I
> know you don't like the Bible and seek to marginalize it, but it doesn't
> support what you're trying to put forward as Christian.
>