The Definition of "Christian"

[fukuda 351]

You can't be a satanist without believing in christianity, sounds more like a heresy than anything else.

[LarksTonguesInAspic 28]

Originally posted by: fukuda You can't be a satanist without believing in christianity, sounds more like a heresy than anything else.quote>

 

Good thing I was able to get around the page flip bug!

Having perused through some Satanic literature and commentary, there is a common theme; they believe there is a God, but just hate Him or portray Him as evil. Satan is worshipped as the 'true' God, and has just been misunderstood or wrongly cast in a negative light. They seem to follow along with the idea that even as a created being, Lucifer can somehow overcome an omnipotent God and take over His throne.

Satanism IMO is the result of an ultimate conclusion of an inward megalomania, or the most extreme extension of selfishness. The ego is paramount, to the point of supplanting even God's power. They don't deny the existence of God, or His creation. They seem to believe that their 'right' to control their own destiny can trump God's sovereignty over that creation.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 7, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[Lambert14 0]

interesting concept...

[saltandsauce 0]

Originally posted by: SkiGeek

Originally posted by: saltandsauce

umm the Latin Mass was deregularised about 50 years ago (it's in the local language. here it's in Polish/English), you can sometimes find Latin Mass but it's hard. quote>

 

Not to quibble but it's closer to 45 years ago.  I remember when it happened.   It was part of the Vatican II reforms.

Prior to Vatican II, the priest faced the altar and spoke in Latin.    I didn't really understand why we were sitting there, looking at the back of some guy speaking in a language I didn't understand.  It seemed pretty pointless to me.

After Vatican II, the priest turned around to face the crowd and spoke in English.  (Well, it was sort of English; it's not like people talk like that in RL but at least the words made some sort of sense.)    They also did radical things like bring in a folk group that had a guitar and a tamborine.   (It wasn't a choir and a pipe organ!  It was shocking!)  People actually left the parish to attend the one down the road since that parish was much slower to embrace the reforms.

 

Getting back to an earlier point, one of the few holdovers from semi-Catholic upbringing is the notion that faith alone doesn't count for much; actions (aka "good works") count for much more.

 quote>

he faced the altar because Mass is not a show, it makes the priest less important i.e. he is more like the congregation. if your looking at the back of his head (which won't be very interesting) it is supposed to be easier to listen to. other rules that have went away. women were supposed to cover their head in church and men must NOT cover their head. this rule has completley gone apart from a very few old people. the bowing of your head whenever Jesus is mentioned has also gone. the thing with the hand on heart when you say the confetior has also gone "I have sinned through my own fault" when the hand goes on the heart originally it was three times

percussion instruments like guitars and tamborines aren't good in churches because they are echoey. this is because it helped carry words to the back of the church before microphones. so woodwind instruments and keyboard instruments (that includes the organ) so the resonance doesn't make the instrument sound like crap.

oh yes. the Vatican gets tons of money from the congregation. A congregation of around 100 each giving an average of £1-£2 will only amount to £150 which probably won't even cover heating bills

Catholic comes from the latin word "Catholicam" meaning "Universal" of course now, it means "very specific"

[Jezus53 18]

Originally posted by: Barbarossa

Okay, let's take a different route and make this more interesting...  I have a question that I expect to receive a vehement NO on, but I will ask anyway (I say YES, for the record).

Are Satanists Christian?  For the most part, they treat Christian doctrine as true and believe Jesus was/is the Son of God.  They just happen to be opposed to doctrine.  After all, their entire focus seems driven towards the Anti-Christ.

Barbarossaquote>

No, because Satanist do not accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior. Simple. Just as how Catholics and Christians are different. They believe almost the same thing, but they have slightly different practices and one would never be considered part of the other.

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: Barbarossa

Are Satanists Christian?  For the most part, they treat Christian doctrine as true and believe Jesus was/is the Son of God.  They just happen to be opposed to doctrine.  After all, their entire focus seems driven towards the Anti-Christ.quote>

You make an interesting point.

Still, they may believe in the divinity of Jesus, but they don't believe he is their savior. So I'd say no. They are, appropriately enough, "Anti-Christian".

Originally posted by: Jezus53

Just as how Catholics and Christians are different. They believe almost the same thing, but they have slightly different practices and one would never be considered part of the other.quote>

Catholics and Protestants may have slightly different practices, but ultimately they share the same belief system: "Jesus is our Lord and Savior".

True, one isn't part of the other, but they are very much related. The difference is like the difference between chocolate and vanila ice cream. It's a different flavor, but most of the ingredients are the same, and they're both ice cream.

On the terminiology front...

Shutting non-protestants out from the term "Christian" only makes sense on an emotional level. From a rational standpoint, it does not. Even from a theological standpoint, it depends on how many conditions you require that someone meet in order to qualify.

And even then, it seems unnecessarily intolerant to be exclusionary like that. Saying that Catholics are not Christian honestly comes across sounding a lot like "Heathens! You think you're so pious but you're not and you're going to hell! We're the true chosen ones and you can't use our term!" to me.

...especially considering that the Catholics were there first. Remember, Protestantism spawned out of Catholicsm. So for Protestants to insist that Catholics are not Christian seems akin to a son insisting that his father has no right to use his last name. By what crazy logic to they claim to have the authority to pass such judgment?

[ShortStraw 1]

Every satanist I've actually met and gotten to know a bit was basically just over reacting to a poorly executed Christian upbringing or had some kind of personal problem with a Christian faith.

The "fact that Catholics and Protestants may have slightly different practices, but ultimately they share the same belief system" is also a big part of why I feel like satanists are christians.  They may have rejected Jesus' personal salvation/message/whatever, but they generally recognize the Holy Trinity which (to my way of thinking) sets them apart from the particularly non christian Biblical religions (such as Judaism and Islam and, er, whatever others may exist).

There may be satanists out there that never were christians, have no pre existing axe to grind with christianity and focus their dogma on Old Testament doctrine, ignoring Jesus and the Trinity and going really old school with their fancy dress rituals and whatever but I have never met one of them and I suspect that if such "Old Testament, pre Christian" satanists exist they are probably an extreme minority.

All that said, if you go so far as to blindly accept the literal existence of any religious legend and you decide to cast your lot with the "Bad Guy" in the story then you obviously have some misfiring synapses or something and should seriously examine your motives and maybe seek some professional help (or better yet, quit toying with religions and focus your energy on comic book movies or the sci fi channel or something, I mean Jesus. . . ).

[Jezus53 18]

Originally posted by: Duke87

And even then, it seems unnecessarily intolerant to be exclusionary like that. Saying that Catholics are not Christian honestly comes across sounding a lot like "Heathens! You think you're so pious but you're not and you're going to hell! We're the true chosen ones and you can't use our term!" to me.

...especially considering that the Catholics were there first. Remember, Protestantism spawned out of Catholicsm. So for Protestants to insist that Catholics are not Christian seems akin to a son insisting that his father has no right to use his last name. By what crazy logic to they claim to have the authority to pass such judgment?

quote>

I understand that the Christian relgion came from Catholicsm, and I understand how saying Christians are not Catholics can be taken the wrong way, but that is not how it is ment. I'm pretty sure you know the inner workings of Catholism and Christianity so I won't bore you with a history lesson, but Catholics pray to saints while Christians pray to God and Jesus. That is why you will never hear a Christian sayignthey are Catholic. Some Christians see this as idolitery and would never be a part of it. It's those "little" things that bring up that debate. Also, I'm sure most Christians would never say that Catholics are not Christians in the sense that they are not saved and that they are evil, they mean that in a very literal way because they are not Christians. Why else would they be seperated?

[LarksTonguesInAspic 28]

Originally posted by: Duke87

True, one isn't part of the other, but they are very much related. The difference is like the difference between chocolate and vanila ice cream. It's a different flavor, but most of the ingredients are the same, and they're both ice cream.quote>

 

More like the difference between ice cream and frozen yogurt, or soft-serve 'ice milk'. The differences may seem small, but are huge, glaring, and fundamental.

Shutting non-protestants out from the term "Christian" only makes sense on an emotional level. From a rational standpoint, it does not. Even from a theological standpoint, it depends on how many conditions you require that someone meet in order to qualify.

And even then, it seems unnecessarily intolerant to be exclusionary like that. Saying that Catholics are not Christian honestly comes across sounding a lot like "Heathens! You think you're so pious but you're not and you're going to hell! We're the true chosen ones and you can't use our term!" to me.

...especially considering that the Catholics were there first. Remember, Protestantism spawned out of Catholicsm. So for Protestants to insist that Catholics are not Christian seems akin to a son insisting that his father has no right to use his last name. By what crazy logic to they claim to have the authority to pass such judgment?

quote>

The authority of the Bible itself. As Paul said, if someone comes along preaching a 'different gospel', even if it is an angel, then they are a liar. Paul also applied that to himself; if he started preaching a gospel different from that he had already presented.

The Catholic Church had completely disregarded Biblical teaching on everything from the primacy of the Pope, the elevation of Mary, and praying to saints all the way through the words of Christ himself. The paganization of Catholicism accelerated the drift away from Biblical truth. The Reformation was a necessary point where those who knew better stood up and said 'enough of your lies and distortions'.

As for intolerance, well, the Inquisition (among many other persecutions) showed who was really the intolerant group, historically. There are Christians within the Catholic Church to be sure, but the institution itself hasn't been friendly toward basic Christian tenets in 1000 years. It hasn't helped matters any when the Vatican declares 'tradition' to carry as much weight as Scripture. If an error is a tradition, how else is it supposed to get by the Scripture Test? 

To an outsider, of course the divergence is easy to gloss over or minimize. To someone up close and personal with the subject, they are irreconcilable.

[Hagar Topeka 1 22]

Jezus53

I understand that the Christian relgion came from Catholicsm, and I understand how saying Christians are not Catholics can be taken the wrong way, but that is not how it is ment. I'm pretty sure you know the inner workings of Catholism and Christianity so I won't bore you with a history lesson, but Catholics pray to saints while Christians pray to God and Jesus. That is why you will never hear a Christian sayignthey are Catholic. Some Christians see this as idolitery and would never be a part of it. It's those "little" things that bring up that debate. Also, I'm sure most Christians would never say that Catholics are not Christians in the sense that they are not saved and that they are evil, they mean that in a very literal way because they are not Christians. Why else would they be seperated?

quote>

OK, I think I know a little bit about this...

I'm pretty sure that a Catholic would say that they are asking the saint to pray to god for them (with much more lengthy explanation which is probably pretty important).

It might be called something like "Advocacy"

Edit: I did some research and found out it's called intercession. Has something to do with the "Communion of Saints."

[Hagar Topeka 1 22]

Originally posted by: manticorefan

Originally posted by: Duke87

True, one isn't part of the other, but they are very much related. The difference is like the difference between chocolate and vanila ice cream. It's a different flavor, but most of the ingredients are the same, and they're both ice cream.quote>

 

More like the difference between ice cream and frozen yogurt, or soft-serve 'ice milk'. The differences may seem small, but are huge, glaring, and fundamental.

quote>

Oh, come on. Both of those arguments are completely without substance. You have no evidence to state that the differences are at all like ice cream, and there for using the analogy of ice cream cannot support your side. While ice cream can be an illustrative tool, it is useless as a real argument until someone can prove its similarity to the debate at hand.

I may as well say that the difference between Thailand and Latvia is like the difference between The Houses of Commons and Lords. There's no evidence that this is true; it makes a nice analogy but using that analogy to support my argument is falacious.

Clearly, this deep-rooted debate topic is not going to be won by either side. Someone needs to give it up.

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: Jezus53

Catholics pray to saints while Christians pray to God and Jesus.quote>

It's often distorted that way, but Catholics do not pray to saints, they ask saints to pray to god on their behalf.

It's a subtle but important difference.

That is why you will never hear a Christian sayignthey are Catholic.quote>

Cart, horse. Nobody's claiming that Christian is a subgroup of Catholic, it's the other way around.

I'm sure most Christians would never say that Catholics are not Christians in the sense that they are not saved and that they are evil,quote>

I know it's not meant that way, but it nevertheless tends to come across in a sort of childish "We're not letting you in our club because you stink" sort of manner. The idea of taking large groups of people who say that they're Christian and coming up with tons of reasons why they're not seems quite puerile to me. I read it as pure spite, though it's possible there's something I'm missing. I've also never heard my Protestant aunt and uncle claim that the rest of my Catholic family isn't Christian, so this whole exclusionary business is something I was not aware of until I was older and it still makes me go .

they mean that in a very literal way because they are not Christians.quote>

I reiterate:

How does one make the claim that a group of people who worships Christ as their savior is not Christian "in a literal way"?

Why else would they be seperated? quote>

They had their disagreements and were unable to resolve them. In some cases, the dissenters made some valid points (Martin Luther). In others, it was merely politically convenient (Henry VIII).

The sticking point here is that the Catholic church was around and was "Christian" long before the Reformation. So, even if you want to consider Protestantism and Catholicism as two completely separate religions and not merely two different flavors of the same one, it's Catholics that are "Christian" and Protestants that are something different, not the other way around. When one group decides to split off from an existing group, they do not get to take the name of the old group, call it theirs, and say that the remaining part of the old group can no longer use it. It's equally as asinine as if Catholics were to claim that they're Jewish and Jews are not.

...though I can see where one would think differently if they viewed the Reformation as a reestablishment of proper order from previous incorrect practices rather than a rebellion where a group of disgruntled members quit the club and went to go start their own (which is, objectively, what it was).

Originally posted by: manticorefan

By what crazy logic to they claim to have the authority to pass such judgment? quote>

The authority of the Bible itself. quote>

Nice, except that Catholics, by the authority of the same bible (more or less), would beg to differ. How does one decide who's right?

As for intolerance, well, the Inquisition (among many other persecutions) showed who was really the intolerant group, historically.quote>

1) Quit trying to play the sympathy card

2) Quit holding the actions of people who have been dead for centuries against their posterity today

the institution itself hasn't been friendly toward basic Christian tenets in 1000 years.quote>

This of course depends on what you consider "basic Christian tenets" and how you inerpret them. It's not clear cut.

It hasn't helped matters any when the Vatican declares 'tradition' to carry as much weight as Scripture. If an error is a tradition, how else is it supposed to get by the Scripture Test? quote>

I agree. You'd think the holy book would take precedence over mere tradition.

But how, logically, does this make the Catholic church "not Christian"? I see no logic in that conclusion.

To an outsider, of course the divergence is easy to gloss over or minimize. To someone up close and personal with the subject, they are irreconcilable.quote>

"Someone up close and personal with the subject". Aren't all the people who would fit that description long dead? Have you or anyone you know ever been persecuted by Cathoics or the Catholic Church? Has any Christian alive today been, for that matter? Not too many, I'd imagine. Hardly "up close and personal".

How is it that people manage to remian so sore about things that were done to their ancestors over 400 years ago as if they personally were victimized by them?

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: Duke87

I know it's not meant that way, but it nevertheless tends to come across in a sort of childish "We're not letting you in our club because you stink" sort of manner. The idea of taking large groups of people who say that they're Christian and coming up with tons of reasons why they're not seems quite puerile to me. I read it as pure spite, though it's possible there's something I'm missing. quote>

I don't see it as spite.   It's more like that old Saturday Night Live skit where some people get to do the superior dance and some people don't.  (probably too old an reference.. never mind.)

 

It goes back to the old shtick of Group A saying they know the truth and everyone else doesn't.

 

One of the more destructive ideas on the planet.

 

[Duke of York 23]

Okay...This is the way I see it....As a Christian I don't see where I have the right to call a

certain denomination " True Christian " Or not, Thats Christ decision alone...I'm a

Protestant. However I'm not about to pick apart the R. Catholic Church or the Church

of Latter Day Saint's...There is a few things I agree with...There is a few things I don't.

It is a hope of mine that the Church will stop arguing and further splitting the Church..Instead

a Unification would bring a healthier more functional Church ( That is of course the Church has

a proper conduct of the Bible and what it states) Some Denominations though are turning Christ

Church into the conducts of Man...For instance, (A church that denies the Moral Conduct of the Bible

to grow the Church or Please an audience)....As long as a Church Teaches the basic teachings...The

rest is a Theology...Now I believe there are great consequences to wrong teaching (More so if there

intentional)...The best thing I can say is that It's up to every Christian to Read and Study the Word of God

for themselves...It is never wise to follow the Church without reading and understanding the Bible in whole to

analyze the Churches Theology....

  -Basic Beliefs -

  -Apostles Creed-

I believe in God, the Father Almighty,

   the Creator of heaven and earth,

   and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord:

Who was conceived of the Holy Spirit,

   born of the Virgin Mary,

   suffered under Pontius Pilate,

   was crucified, died, and was buried.

He descended into hell.

The third day He arose again from the dead.

He ascended into heaven

   and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty,

   whence He shall come to judge the living and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic church,

   the communion of saints,

   the forgiveness of sins,

   the resurrection of the body,

   and life everlasting.

[Easy Bakes 253]

Ladder Day Saints?

Ladder Day would be an interesting holiday.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[_Atticus 10]

Originally posted by: manticorefan

The Catholic Church had completely disregarded Biblical teaching on everything from the primacy of the Pope, the elevation of Mary, and praying to saints all the way through the words of Christ himself. The paganization of Catholicism accelerated the drift away from Biblical truth. The Reformation was a necessary point where those who knew better stood up and said 'enough of your lies and distortions'. quote>

First of all, I'm a Roman Catholic, and I find this mind-boggling.

The Pope's power was derived from Christ himself, when he chose Peter, the first Pope, to build his new church on, and since then, Peter's authority has been passed down through the generations. So I don't see how the teaching on primacy of the Pope has been disregarded.

Catholics don't worship the Virgin or any other saint. We ask for them to intercede for us to God, as they are in Heaven and very close to Him. The reason why the Church "elevates" Mary, is because she is the mother of God, and that in and of itself, merits special treatment. But whatever anyone says, Catholics do not worship Mary, simply admire her and ask for her intercession.

If anything, Protestants are the ones drifiting away from Biblical truth. Things such as sola scriptura and sola fides can only be found in the Bible if taken out of context.

But the institution itself hasn't been friendly toward basic Christian tenets in 1000 years. quote>

Please elaborate.

-Pingangster

[Scotland Tom 0]

Alright, here's a question for the Catholics out there...

Why pray to God through Mary or the saints to begin with? God is there. He's open to us. He wants to hear from us. Why do we need an intermediary? If God loves each and every one of us unquestioningly and unconditionally then wouldn't he be just as willing to hear our personal words of prayer as he would the words of those who have served him in the past?

If I'm a child of God, I'd like to be able to actually talk directly with my Father. Again, why should I talk with him through someone else?

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[Jezus53 18]

Originally posted by: Duke87

Originally posted by: Jezus53

Catholics pray to saints while Christians pray to God and Jesus.quote>

It's often distorted that way, but Catholics do not pray to saints, they ask saints to pray to god on their behalf.

It's a subtle but important difference. quote>

Then I will be more clear next time I say that because I understand that concept. My family is divided between Catholic and Christian so I understand both sides.

Cart, horse. Nobody's claiming that Christian is a subgroup of Catholic, it's the other way around. quote>

The other way around? How so? How is Catholism a subgroup of Christianity? If you see the history of the Christian church, you would see that Christianity, if any, would be the subgroup. But that is not the point.

I know it's not meant that way, but it nevertheless tends to come across in a sort of childish "We're not letting you in our club because you stink" sort of manner. The idea of taking large groups of people who say that they're Christian and coming up with tons of reasons why they're not seems quite puerile to me. I read it as pure spite, though it's possible there's something I'm missing. I've also never heard my Protestant aunt and uncle claim that the rest of my Catholic family isn't Christian, so this whole exclusionary business is something I was not aware of until I was older and it still makes me go . quote>

Well I have never seen it either. The only thing I have to go off of is what I see in my family, and neither side would say they were the other, but neither side would claim the other is stupid and are "not allowed in their club." They simply see the differences and see that the other side is not their type of thing. Catholics are more of a ritrualistic style of Christianity. Some see rituals against the bible, some don't. The point is that they accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior.

they mean that in a very literal way because they are not Christians.quote>

I reiterate:

How does one make the claim that a group of people who worships Christ as their savior is not Christian "in a literal way"?

quote>

Let me make this simple. They are Catholic not Christian just as how Christians are not Catholic. It's their practices that make them different. That is why one really doesn't consier the other apart of theirs.

[Jezus53 18]

Originally posted by: Barbarossa

More to the point, what exactly is wrong with appealing to your God through an intermediary?

quote>

It's all about the individual. Some people think it's wrong to pray through an intermediary because they see in the bible that God wants to have a personal relationship with them. Others see themselves not worthy enough to talk to God personally so they have to pray through an intermeniary. I have no problem if you want ot pray through an intermediary and I think it's very humble of you to do so, but personally, I have been taught that God want's a personal relationship with me and I see praying through an intermediary as not very personal.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[hym 358]

Originally posted by: Barbarossa

After all, a measly little nobody (and I don't mean you, specifically) wants to make a direct appeal to the supposed (in my mind) Creator of the Universe and All Life As We Know It.  Kind of presumptuous, don't you think?quote>

Not if the being in question gave his okay for people to speak with him directly, which is what many (if not most) Protestants believe.  I think the explanatory wording is "Just as a child would speak with his father without fear of reprisal, so too we should feel free speak with our heavenly father directly."

[hym 358]

Originally posted by: Barbarossa

After all, a measly little nobody (and I don't mean you, specifically) wants to make a direct appeal to the supposed (in my mind) Creator of the Universe and All Life As We Know It.  Kind of presumptuous, don't you think?quote>

Not if the being in question gave his okay for people to speak with him directly, which is what many (if not most) Protestants believe.  I think the explanatory wording is "Just as a child would speak with his father without fear of reprisal, so too we should feel free speak with our heavenly father directly."

[Retep Molinari 68]

Originally posted by: Barbarossa

Originally posted by: Jezus53

Cart, horse. Nobody's claiming that Christian is a subgroup of Catholic, it's the other way around. quote>

The other way around? How so? How is Catholism a subgroup of Christianity? If you see the history of the Christian church, you would see that Christianity, if any, would be the subgroup. But that is not the point.quote>

they mean that in a very literal way because they are not Christians.quote>

I reiterate:

How does one make the claim that a group of people who worships Christ as their savior is not Christian "in a literal way"?

quote>

Let me make this simple. They are Catholic not Christian just as how Christians are not Catholic.quote>

These comments are inane (not a typo).  Catholics are Christian, Christians are not necessarily Catholic.  Get it together, man.

Barbarossa

quote>

I second that. To add, Christian is the "mother group" which can be split between Catholics and Protestants (including methodists, baptisis, mormons, lutherians, calvinists, etc)

[_Atticus 10]

And for the record, Catholics are allowed to and do pray to God directly. It's just that asking for a saint's intercession adds to the power of your prayer. It's a question of simple math. The more people praying for you, the better.

-Pingangster

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: Retep Molinari

I second that. To add, Christian is the "mother group" which can be split between Catholics and Protestants (including methodists, baptisis, mormons, lutherians, calvinists, etc)   quote>

 

Exactly.  They all have different takes on it but the basic belief in Jesus Christ is present in all of those groups.

Originally posted by: pingangster

And for the record, Catholics are allowed to and do pray to God directly. It's just that asking for a saint's intercession adds to the power of your prayer. It's a question of simple math. The more people praying for you, the better.quote>

 

It's like bringing an expert along.   Each saint is the patron of something.  usually a lot of things.

For instance, Michael the Archangel is the patron saint of paratroopers.  (and if you want a medal with a picture of him on one side and the insignia of the 82nd Airborne on the other side, I can arrange that.)

[hamsterTK 93]

I get the feeling there is more to the Protestant vs Catholic thing than just theology. Back maybe 100 years ago or so there were some major prejudices surrounding this.

Protestants typically where the anglo capitalist or business types who also involved in the enlightenment and the founding of the US. The whole belief in invidualism and you get Calvinism, or the Ben Franklin "god helps those who help themselves"

Catholics were always associated with the Latin culture, in the old derogatory sort of way. Going back to the time when the church controlled everything and scorned invidual wealth save for the influential class(Medici's). It also kind of meant someone wasn't a hard worker, that people were slow and not timely, etc.

Remember in the play version of Streetcar Named Desire when Blanche tells Stanley that her name "DuBois" is Hugenot? Hugenot French of course being higher up in the social strata of the old Plantation south, because they were Protestant not Roman Catholic.

Yet another piece of proof that the past sucked balls...

[Jezus53 18]

Originally posted by: Retep Molinari

Originally posted by: Barbarossa

Originally posted by: Jezus53

Cart, horse. Nobody's claiming that Christian is a subgroup of Catholic, it's the other way around. quote>

The other way around? How so? How is Catholism a subgroup of Christianity? If you see the history of the Christian church, you would see that Christianity, if any, would be the subgroup. But that is not the point.quote>

they mean that in a very literal way because they are not Christians.quote>

I reiterate:

How does one make the claim that a group of people who worships Christ as their savior is not Christian "in a literal way"?

quote>

Let me make this simple. They are Catholic not Christian just as how Christians are not Catholic.quote>

These comments are inane (not a typo).  Catholics are Christian, Christians are not necessarily Catholic.  Get it together, man.

Barbarossa

quote>

I second that. To add, Christian is the "mother group" which can be split between Catholics and Protestants (including methodists, baptisis, mormons, lutherians, calvinists, etc)

quote>

*face palm*

This is why arguing on the internet sucks. Look, when I say Christian I mean Protestants in your terms and I will start using that term to try and clear things up. Also, the first statement I said is from a historical view point, the second one is the view point of other people. If you are trying to catch me contradicting myself then you failed. If you want my personal opinion on this then here it is, it's a huge waste of time and should never be brought up. I could care less if you are Catholic, Christian, Jewish, Satanist, whatever. As long as you respect my view then I'll respect yours. I am only speaking on behalf of the other side. There is my view and I am done trying to defend the other side. Good day.