The Upper Room

1:31 AM

The more I learn about Christianity, the more I begin to realize that the expressions that Christians so often use are reflections of deeply held beliefs and religious experiences, which may not be completely comprehensible to an outsider of the faith.

"Meeting Jesus" = This phrase does not mean physically meeting Jesus; it just means that the person is saved or has committed his life to Christ.

Ryan Frame

@Anonymous: it's like that with any culture though; if I were to overhear a conversation between two molecular biologists I would be lost. It takes time to figure things out.

Anonymous

"I am saved!" = This phrase does not mean a person is lost at sea or in the wilderness, though that may be a good metaphor to describe a person's "lost" soul entrenched in sin with a tiny grain of hope that the person may turn from sin and toward God.

TRiG

@Anonymous Flipping complicated to define, and differs between denominations.

Anonymous

I was thinking of the Arminian version of salvation.

You know, the type that is often employed by campus preachers?

TRiG

@Anonymous Who the what now?

Anonymous

1:40 AM

You don't know who is Arminius?

TRiG

I am not American, and know little of these "campus preachers" of whom you speak.

Anonymous

Jacobus Arminius

Jacobus ArminiusAlso known by the Anglicized names of Jacob Arminius, James Arminius, or Jakob Herman. (October 10, 1560 – October 19, 1609), the Latinized name of the Dutch theologian Jakob Hermanszoon from the Protestant Reformation period, served from 1603 as professor in theology at the University of Leiden. He wrote many books and treatises on theology, and his views became the basis of Arminianism and the Dutch Remonstrant movement. Following his death, his challenge to the Reformed standard, the Belgic Confession, provoked ample discussion at the Synod of Dort, which crafted t...

Arminianism is at odds with Calvinism.

TRiG

@Anonymous Yeah. I know. Calvinism is the nasty one, and Arminianism is the one I don't know much about.

Anonymous

@TRiG What do you mean by "nasty one"?

TRiG

@Anonymous I just have an almost visceral dislike of Calvinism.

Anonymous

1:59 AM

Explain?

You don't like the name "Calvin"? ;-)

TRiG

@Anonymous Too tired to put it into words right now. But I've said something about it here before.

Oct 4 '11 at 18:31, by TRiG

I've said before that I'd quite like to believe in a decent God, if I thought there was any evidence for one, but if I truly believed in the god of Calvin, I hope I'd have the courage and moral fortitude to spit in his face. I think it's the notion of God hating humanity that freaks me out. That, and the way so many Calvinists seem to relish in the thought of others' suffering.

Oct 4 '11 at 18:58, by TRiG

@Caleb I just think a religion which teaches, straightforwardly and unapologetically, that God hates humanity is a bit iffy.

Click links for context.

Mar 14 at 17:38, by TRiG

@Alypius Calvinism is weird. Deeply deeply weird. It's also morally incoherent. Don't try wrapping your head around it: you will fail, and you will not be the better for the experience.

Anonymous

2:17 AM

You do not like Calvinism, and you do not know why you do not like Calvinism. Weird...

Anonymous

3:45 AM

I have to admit, I am quite thankful that I have discovered this website. It's quite uncommon to find a website that allows anybody to participate in answering questions. I used to answer questions on Yahoo about Chemistry, Biology, and Mathematics to exercise my expertise; now I found this website to exercise my knowledge on Religion. It's kind of fun looking up information on the Internet database, and I learn something new every time.

It may also help me become more acquainted with Christianity, so that I may select a church that would fit me theologically.

Or a Christian point-of-view that is identifiable with reality and human experience.

I wonder what counts as "belief".

If concurring belief means finding the right school of thought that fits well with one's perceptions of reality and human experience, then I suppose that would be the minimal requirement for entrance into christendom.

Though, one may have to "dumb down" the knowledge for one's children to understand in order to baptize one's children as infants and raise one's children Christian.

TRiG

4:26 AM

@Anonymous Please don't do that.

@waxeagle and other gamers, "The rules clearly state that there’s a penalty for using range weapons in melee."

TRiG

4:44 AM

And Tim LaHaye was "slightly wrong on the subject of the Beast".

Anonymous

4:17 PM

Why is the name of this chatroom called "The Upper Room"?

The name "Christianity" is the bottom-right-hand corner has a cross; the cross denotes Christianity.

The banner that contains this message box has puffy white clouds, which denote the heavenly clouds or pearly white gates of heaven.

It's funny how Christianity has the concepts of heaven and hell, but Judaism, the religion from which it sprang out, has no such concepts.

I wish Christianity would maintain its Jewish roots.

Ryan Frame

@Anonymous : The "upper room" is where Jesus spent the Passover with His disciples prior to His crucifixion. See Luke 22.

Anonymous

@RyanFrame Your source says "guest room".

Ryan Frame

I never learn to read my sources...

biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2022&version=NKJV

Anonymous

5:19 PM

@RyanFrame You use the New King James Version. Are you Protestant? Roman Catholics do not use the King James Version, as King James was a Protestant king of England. As a matter of fact, I do recall that Catholics once filed a lawsuit when the KJV was used in schools; the issue was linked to first amendment rights of the constitution, which prohibited the federal government from favoring one religion over another.

Ryan Frame

Yes, I am

Anonymous

@RyanFrame Oh... which denomination?

And why do you like the Protestant church over the Roman Catholic church?

I wonder which category the Eastern Orthodox churches or the Assyrian Church of the East or the Coptic Orthodox Church would belong to.

Ryan Frame

I'm technically Southern Baptist. It's not that I like it more; it's just that there are a few things I disagree with in Catholicism.

Anonymous

@RyanFrame On which aspect of Roman Catholicism do you disagree?

Southern Baptists rule by the congregation, so it may be hard to generalize what Southern Baptists believe in on a local level. They are evangelical, so that may give some hints. And they believe in believer's baptism -- the signature of all Baptists.

Ryan Frame

I'm not sure my disagreements are such that they can be presented as a list -- I can't just give an accurate one or two sentences. There are certain things I disagree with, and therefore reject Catholicism, and there are other things I disagree with because I've rejected Catholicism (infallibility of the Pope, etc).

There are also things Catholicism teaches that I think Protestants should pay closer attention to.

Anonymous

5:37 PM

@RyanFrame Old Catholics reject the pope too. So, you must reject Roman Catholicism but not Catholicism in general. That was how the Old Catholics separated from the Roman Catholic Church.

Ryan Frame

I only reject papal infallibility because I've rejected Catholicism as a whole; if I convert, I will have no problem accepting it -- I don't reject Catholicism because of that doctrine.

Anonymous

@RyanFrame Care to give examples?

Ryan Frame

I'm uncertain about the nature of the Eucharist (transubstantiation). That's probably the biggest thing.

I think they take the veneration of Mary a little too far, though I also think most Protestants don't go far enough.

Anonymous

►

The video seems to be created by a Roman Catholic with a holier-than-thou attitude toward Protestants.

It does answer your question on transubstantiation, though.

Ryan Frame

I doubt it's holier-than-thou as much as what he believes seems so obvious to him that he doesn't understand how others could disagree.

Bach's Ave Maria is a beautiful piece on guitar, and is the first thing I think of when I see or hear the words.

Sorry for going off-topic

That only answers the transubstantiation question if we interpret the text the same way he does -- the reason people disagree is because it can be interpreted differently.

Anonymous

5:58 PM

I am reading from the NRSV of John 6:52-58, and it looks like they are really suggesting transubstantiation. "Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you." Just earlier, the Jews interpret his words literally. And Jesus does not seem to correct the Jewish thought; therefore, it is implied that the bread and wine are the flesh and blood of Christ.

Part of Jesus' personality is to correct people, holding conversations with people. There is no correction in the literal interpretation of the Jews who are listening to him in the passage. Hmmm... sometimes I wonder if it's due to the translation.

On the other hand, I think it is my top-down processing of my brain that is interpreting the text to fit the view of Roman Catholics. (It's a Neuroscience thing.)

Ryan Frame

I know; but in Matthew 26 he's telling His disciples "This is My body" prior to His death and resurrection. It reads like pure symbolism -- how could they take part in a sacrifice that hadn't yet been made? And yet Paul's warnings to the Corinthians shows that it isn't just a symbol, but is something more.

Did His disciples understand that first Supper to be more than symbolism? If they didn't, did He correct them? (obviously we can't actually know this, but I imagine they were confused)

Anonymous

6:24 PM

@RyanFrame I think transubstantiation means that the bread and wine transform into the flesh and blood of Jesus. So, I think the passage in Matthew may be interpreted to mean that Jesus is real, and by taking his "flesh and blood", they are saved. The flesh and blood are real, because Jesus is real, not a symbol.

Ryan Frame

I think I have a question for the site in mind now... thanks.

Anonymous

I think the book of John gives a stronger support for transubstantiation than the book of Matthew. Matthew probably does not think that the dialogue between Jesus and the Jews are important.

So, maybe it really depends on which book of the Bible and which translation you are using. :P

Ryan Frame

We have to examine it as a whole; we can't just pick what we like and ignore the rest.

Anonymous

Yeah, but why do Protestants reject the apocryphal texts?

Maybe there is something good in the gospel of Thomas.

The construction of the biblical canon does not seem to be as clear-cut as one thinks or wants it to be.

Ryan Frame

They're not rejected as useless; they're rejected as not Scripture inspired of God.

Anonymous

6:33 PM

@RyanFrame How do you know that they are not inspired by God?

By the way, what does biblical inspiration mean to you?

@RyanFrame I think that is easier said than done. On the topic of transubstantiation, it seems to be easier to find support for it in John than Matthew. However, as a whole, I think it is more easier to take away something to add something. As the old adage goes, it's easier to dig a hole than build a pole.

Ryan Frame

Verbal plenary inspiration. God worked and guided it so the authors freely wrote the message God wanted

Agreed.

Anonymous

@RyanFrame Agree to what?

Ryan Frame

"I think that is easier said than done." Hence the thousands of denominations and sects.

Anonymous

7:01 PM

@RyanFrame Instead of founding a new denomination, maybe it's best to take a look at the similarities and the most important aspect of Christianity - the resurrection of Jesus.

Ryan Frame

Amen

Anonymous

@RyanFrame What do you mean by "worked and guided"? How "free" were the authors?

Ryan Frame

As free as you and I writing right now.

Anonymous

@RyanFrame So, is the "worked and guided" part a metaphor?

Ryan Frame

God organized things so that what they would freely write was what He wanted written. The actual words they used came from their backgrounds and situations, but the message is from God.

Ever heard of middle knowledge?

Anonymous

7:18 PM

@RyanFrame Just now.

@RyanFrame How is that "free"?

In academia, a person can plagiarise another person's work word-for-word or take a person's ideas but write in his or her own words.

Ryan Frame

If God didn't know the future, yet created the world just as He actually has, the same events would occur as they actually have, right? God doesn't know what's going to happen, so it's difficult to accuse Him of planning our actions. Why does the fact that He actually does know the future change anything about us and our freedom?

I feel like my reasoning is circular here, but given more time I think I could explain it better.

Anonymous

I thought biblical inspiration meant in the same way as artistic inspiration. Artists get inspired from their subjects, and the message and method of expressing their feelings for their subjects come through in their artworks.

Ryan Frame

I think a truly omniscient God would by definition have middle knowledge.

Anonymous

@RyanFrame Why do you suppose that God is omniscient?

Ryan Frame

There are various definitions of inspiration

4

Q: Biblical evidence for omnipotence/omniscience

Does GOD tell us in the bible he is almighty/omnipotent/omniscient, or are these attributes (greek?) philosophers and theologians merely ascribed to HIM?

Anonymous

7:33 PM

Still, what are the indicators of inspiration prior to canonization?

Ryan Frame

It was widely believed as such

6

A: A unique characteristic for all canonical books

Technically, the only "criteria" for canonicity is widespread acceptance. Looking at canonical lists up through the Festal Letter canonicity was always based on "what seemed most profitable to the reader" at the time. That said, the Council of Trent said All New Testament Books share a claim t...

If God inspired its writing, it's only natural that He would guide the formation of the canon

Anonymous

8:22 PM

So, the reasoning for widespread acceptance is that the people who knew Jesus in person and listened to him were held more credible than people who didn't know Jesus but ascribed sayings to him.

@RyanFrame I think that the underlying assumption is that God is real and has an influence of the world.

Paul A. Clayton

8:57 PM

Could someone with 2500+ rep. suggest making the tags st-augustine-of-hippo and augustine-of-hippo synonyms? (I don't know which should be primary; each has 2 questions. Many protestants use St. without meaning it in the Catholic sense. Wikipedia uses "Augustine of Hippo".)

caseyr547

ugh you need 2500 points to do that?

why not just post on meta?

@PaulA.Clayton ^

Paul A. Clayton

@caseyr547 I did not post on meta because it is a one-time temporary item. It I took the effort to thoroughly examine the tags, I might find some other clean up worth considering--enough to justify a Meta question, but this seemed a bit trivial for a Meta question. (I will probably post to Meta if the chat post has no effect.) On the other hand, a Meta post could be useful to decide the "" vs. "st-" issue.

caseyr547

ok i see caleb and waxegale and jon ericson are in the room but not active

ping them

i know all three have enough points

Paul A. Clayton

9:15 PM

@waxeagle I just asked here about making two tags synonyms: st-augustine-of-hippo and augustine-of-hippo. pinging you because I also thought you might be interested in contributing to a faq on writers--not that I want to heap more tasks upon you.

wax eagle

10:15 PM

@PaulA.Clayton meta.christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/229/… could you post an answer here so we can get some more eye on it and decide which between our 3 augustine tags should be the parent tag.

Anonymous

10:25 PM

@waxeagle Compared to humans, it seems to me that computers lack the capability to attach meaning.

I think I am going on a philosophical tangent, wondering how humans can mysteriously attach meaning and what meaning is.

wax eagle

@Anonymous yes. what kind of professional background do you have? computers have no ability to attach meaning to anything unless they are programmed to. And then their understanding of said meaning is completely limited by the parameters of the program.

databases are really good (when properly designed) at relating concepts.

but they are bound by very specific structures

Paul A. Clayton

@waxeagle Doh! I think I encountered that question before! Such is an obvious place for that. Thank you for pointing out the obvious!

wax eagle

@PaulA.Clayton meh no problemo. I also answered your meta post, hopefully it sheds some light, if I can clarify anything let me know

Anonymous

10:42 PM

@waxeagle I don't have a profession; I am a college/university student, trying to earn a degree in Neuroscience.

Even then, my knowledge of Neuroscience is fairly rudimentary, compared to professional scholars and researchers in the field.

wax eagle

@Anonymous gotcha.

Paul A. Clayton

@waxeagle The synonym suggestion has been posted. By the way, I did not realize that you were not that involved at Writers. I thought I saw you present in their chat and just assumed that meant you were relatively involved. (I just want more people to work on that FAQ--writers should be able to provide an excellent answer for a writing question.) I also realize that any moderator is already quite busy. Thanks for the help here (and for shouldering some of the moderation burden here).

wax eagle

10:59 PM

@PaulA.Clayton yeah, I don't think I've ever posted there. I started hanging out in their chat slightly before and during Nano...I pop back in de ves en quando....I like talking to the regulars in there

Stack Exchange

2

Q: When to post in chat and when in Meta?

When should a question, suggestion, discussion-starter, or the like be posted in chat (The Upper Room) and when should such be made a Meta question? It seems that for items with little historical significance, posting to chat might slightly reduce clutter in Meta. Given the definition of The Up...

discussion chat meta

Transcript for