[net.religion] Reply to Mark Terribile on preaching

tim (03/27/83)

This sort of dialogue can be hard to do on the net. To keep it
clear, I'll indicate Mark's statements by a line of stars above
and below them.

**********************************************************************
Well, almost. We are told to go out and preach the good news (Gospel) to
everyone.  That may or may not be called converting, depending on whether
you are looking to make it read as a ``snarl'' or as a ``purr'' (ie, positive
or negative connotatons.
**********************************************************************

Why do you consider conversion negative? You are preaching in hopes
that the person will become a Christian. What's wrong with that if
you're one yourself? I don't see anything wrong with it.

**********************************************************************
I don't believe that ANY of the older (mature?) Christian denominations
(eg Roman C., Lutheran, Anglican, etc.) today claims that it it the ONLY
road to salvation.  After all, Jesus is recorded as sayng ``I have other
sheep that are not of this fold''. No, I don't have a bible in my desk in
whch to find the exact reference, although I rather suspect that is is in
Matthew somewhere.
**********************************************************************

You're wrong. Many modern churches preach exclusive salvation (if not
their sect, then at least Christianity). Most Christians believe that
only Christians can go to Heaven, although by no means all. Jesus is
also recorded as saying that he was the only gate to Heaven; sorry,
don't have any of my Bibles handy to provide the exact reference.

**********************************************************************
	A Christian who doesn't preach is showing insensitivity.

No, based on the attitude that Tim presents above, a Crhistian who didn't
preach would be guilty of negligently sending folks to eternal damnation.
**********************************************************************

In what way do you differ with me here? Seems like we're saying the
same thing.

**********************************************************************
On the other hand, if you don't believe in the premiss of a discussion perhaps
you shouldn't try to disrupt it (Ignition accomplished).  Why should an athiest
try to inflict anti--thiestic views on folks who want to discuss the meaning of
a scripture passage.  I am not pointing fingers at anyone here Tim, so please
don't take the comment wrongly.  I just don't want to see this group taken over
in a ``rabbit<BANG>bimmler'' type raid.  (Disable burners).
**********************************************************************

Sure you're not pointing any fingers. Sure.

Anyone is free to believe anything they want. However, for them to
expect the rest of the world to ignore them when they seem like fools
is unreasonable. It's also hypocritical; I don't see many fundamentalists
butting out of evolution debates.

**********************************************************************
To be more positive, what follows is the sort of thing that I for one
would like to see on this group.

The Catholic Gospel reading last Sunday was the well known story of the
woman caught in adultery.  For the uninitiated, here is a summary:
**********************************************************************

Mark then went on to discuss some Bible passages. I take it then that
you want to see more discussion of the Bible and less of basic issues
that cut across the boundaries of all religions -- the nature of faith,
the role of religion in society, the verifiability of prophecy, etc.
I disagree entirely; I'd like to see more of the latter, and less of
the inbred Judeo-Christian stuff, which can't help but be fairly boring
to the rest of us. Nevertheless, as always, the prime determiner of
what forms the majority will be who submits the most articles, and
I have no intention of trying to silence anyone, either by drowning
them out or by more seditious means.

Tim Maroney

mat (03/29/83)

I guess I don't write well.  Ok Tim, here it is.  I would like to see
discussion about MORE material, be it Scripture -- of ANY major world religon --
or any of the things that you suggest.  I would like to see less argument
afterward in the public forum.  What is the ``r'' key for.  We have
discussions that have degenerated into arguments as each tries to present
an opposing point of view.  This isn't network TV and we don't need
``responsible spokesmen with opposing points of view'', since, I hope,
we all know that they exist.
					-!hou5e!mat
					Mark Terribile
					DoDN