Well, good work at any rate. It's nice to find someone on the internet who actually knows what I'm talking about when I reference my own country.
I've known about the Rainbow Warrior for a while ... c'mon, I've been into politics since I was a kid, and especially with the semi-recent uproar of environmentalist policies, it's something that everybody should know about, but (as with most situations) most people don't.
I'm pleasantly surprised by your knowledge of New Zealand history. You're challenging my stereotype of unworldly American citizens. Stop it. But really, how do you know so much about the Rainbow Warrior? Did you read about it when I mentioned it, and acted like you knew all along? Or did you learn it somewhere? Or have you come across it before? I mean, the nationality of the photographer was a fairly obscure point, in a strange case in a pretty obscure country. What game are you playing at, hmm?
Hey man, what can you tell me about this conservative 'tea party' business? I thought you would know about it, since I've heard (read) you say that you think there's been no 'real conservatives' since Reagan. Like that time you said you would sooner vote for an 'honest Democrat' than a Republican. Won't it just split the conservative vote?
TFFer You Wouldn’t Mind Getting Stuck in a Lift With. Alpha -- It'd be interesting to discuss our opinions, whether stuck in an elevator or (preferably) over a few beers. A few beers sounds good
When does God ask for manifestation of our faith? I don't think I've seen much about that, but I would probably consider it like I do baptism -- it's a way to show our faith, but the faith is more important. A person can convert and die the next day, and end up in Heaven -- but if somebody is a good person all their life (but never a Christian), they won't. Your Mother Teresa quote is interesting, but you've got to remember -- not only does he have absolutely no divine power or influence, her quote is also from her, not from the Bible. For all the good things she did, she's still on the same plane as everybody else -- either saved from Hell or not. And thanks for the would-be rep, but I don't think I warrant it. I got caught up in a petty argument with a pathetic little child, I shouldn't be rewarded for pulling my head out of my ass and realizing that I'm better than that. I bought into a troll.
Oh, and I can't give you rep again yet, but I was going to give you pos rep for your response in the Healthcare Thread. I liked that (both of) you have reverted to maturity, and your response seem well-constructed (more so than usual). I haven't got time to respond at the moment, and probably won't for a few days, but I'll try to get round to it.
So if works reveal faith, then they are one and the same? When you say that faith is all that is required to get into Heaven, aren't you implying that works are needed too, as they are part of a 'real' faith? Your second point is convincing, but doesn't God ask for a manifestation of our faith? You're probably not going to like this, but in the words of Mother Teresa: "On the last day, Jesus will say to those on His right hand, "Come, enter the Kingdom. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was sick and you visited me." Then Jesus will turn to those on His left hand and say, "Depart from me because I was hungry and you did not feed me, I was thirsty and you did not give me to drink, I was sick and you did not visit me." These will ask Him, "When did we see You hungry, or thirsty or sick and did not come to Your help?" And Jesus will answer them, "Whatever you neglected to do unto one of these least of these, you neglected to do unto Me!""
Works show faith , but are not necessary to enter Heaven. The only thing that matters in that regard is faith -- but our works reveal our faith. If we have no works, the "faith" we claim to have is dead. We can claim to have faith all we want, but what good is it if our works show otherwise? That's the point of the passage. Also remember that James is talking about the relationships between believers and other people, not believers and God. Our works reveal our faith to other people, but God knows our faith anyway. Hence, works aren't required for salvation.
So one can have a "dead", useless, faith and saunter into Heaven? Works show faith, indeed. But doesn't this passage suggest that they are both neccessary? Faith precludes works, and works demonstrate faith. How, then, is faith "the only thing that gets us into Heaven", when it requires works?
Like I said, works show faith. What good is it if you believe that you should do the right thing, but don't? If that was the case, then it's apparent that you don't believe that. That's what it's saying -- works aren't important to get into Heaven, but they do reveal the faith of a person.
Yes, but didn't you say that it is by faith alone that one is saved? But "what good is it ... if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds?" Surely that suggests we need both faith and deeds? Sure, it doesn't tell us to stop believing and start doing, but it also does not say that we should stop doing and start believing. Faith without action is dead - there's no point to it. I'd say it is both invisible and selfish.
That section of James illustrates that our works SHOW our faith -- nowhere in the Bible does it ever say that works are more important, or anywhere near as important, as faith. In fact, the Bible says many, many times that faith is the only thing that gets us into Heaven.
This made me think of you: "What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him? Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, 'Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,' but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead. But someone will say, 'You have faith; I have deeds.' Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do." (James 2:14-18)
Catholics don't (officially) pray to Mary or to any saint. We pray to them to ask them to pray to God on our behalf. Most Protestants believe that Mary's soul is in Heaven - and surely no Christian can deny that, as why would she be in Hell? Catholics add to that the belief that Mary's body is in Heaven. If no one really dies, but instead inherits eternal life, then why should we not ask them, as people who now reside with God, to pray for us, on our behalf? All prayer is to God, so why is it so bad to go through an intermediary if it has the same purpose? Where does it say (in scripture, because you're good at this) that it is wrong to ask another human to pray for you? The older usage of the word "pray" is synonymous with "to ask". So we ask Mary to pray to God on our behalf. In the I Confess we say, “And I ask blessed Mary, all the angels and saints, and you my brothers and sisters to pray for me to the Lord our God.” In the Hail Mary we say, “Holy Mary, mother of God, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death.” To give a scriptural argument, "My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior. For He has regarded the lowly state of his maidservant; for behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed." (Lk 1:46-49) So if by praying to Mary, Catholics are more able to focus on Christ (magnify), enhancing prayer cannot be a bad thing, can it? (BTW, thanks for getting back to me, I thought you never would )
