Why would aliens have souls, when octopi don't? Or have I got souls wrong?

Why does the Pope have his own meteorite collection and curator?

RationalAtheist

Just popping in...my one post for the day, funnily enough.

Octopi do in fact have souls; they have irrational souls. Humans, conversely, have rational souls. (You'll have to do some research for yourself to look up the differences; I'm pressed for time today.)

Actually, if I remember it correctly, all beings have at minimum an irrational soul; certain beings possess rational souls instead. So really, what's being said here by the good doctor is nothing that the Church did not already teach (alien beings being beings, after all).

C. S. Lewis also had some excellent comments on the theological implications of alien life, if memory serves. You might want to look those up as well.

You are entitled to your beliefs and so are Calvinists.blackregiment

How atypically conciliatory! :)

The Word of God says...

1Jn 5:11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
1Jn 5:12 He that hath the Son hath life: and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.
1Jn 5:13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

Joh 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

Psa 118:8 It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man.

I believe it.blackregiment

As do I. But then, that is not what our discussion has been about.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.blackregiment

How atypically conciliatory! :)

Funny that you would bring that up since I have not mentioned the Eucharist, nor has anyone else. Trying to "steer the conversation" a certain way are you?:shock:blackregiment

You're welcome, of course, to refuse to be steered. You have indeed not brought that up, though I did not say you have. You did, however, bring up a tangential issue, with your repudiation of the necessity of attending worship with one's fellow believers.

I do find it interesting that you would attempt to lead the discussion into the area of an individual's salvation, based on their denomination and traditions, when I have explicitly stated that no one can know a person's heart or their relationship with Christ and that denomination is not what is important. I have said over an over that Scripture teaches that salvation is through God's grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. I have stated that the Church one attends is irrelevant and the important thing is to trust in Christ alone. In fact, the Word of God does not speak of denominations at all. What makes it most interesting is that in an earlier comment, you were the one that suggested that Calvinists could "come to know salvation", implying that they are unsaved, because of their beliefs and also that Calvinists beliefs are "errant".blackregiment

I'm not really trying to steer the discussion in that direction, actually, but it's interesting that you feel I am. Are you perhaps resisting the temptation, the urge, to begin pronouncing upon such matters, as once you were wont to do?

I did indeed suggest that Calvinists could come to know salvation; I would and do say the same thing about any Christian, and even about those for whom I pray who are not currently Christian. I earnestly hope that all come to know salvation. In saying as much, I do not imply that any individual person is "unsaved", nor do I imply or assert that they are "saved"; to do either would be highly presumptuous, and would in fact constitute an attempt by me to assert authority that is properly reserved for Christ alone.

I am, in other words, speaking in complete consistency with my stated belief that none of us can know or dictate the status of our salvation, or the status of the salvation of others, to Christ; we can only work out our own salvation with fear and trembling, in the hope of entering into that glorious Kingdom. I am not a Calvinist, in other words: I do not call myself "saved" for this reason; I do not assert that any other is assuredly "unsaved" for the same reason. Both matters are entirely beyond my authority as a mere human.

Since, as the above comments reflect, you not I, were the one suggesting that Calvinists "can still come to know salvation", and that their beliefs are "errant" and "fail", perhaps you might want to heed your own advice since you are the only one in this thread telling other Christians that their beliefs are "errant" and "opposed to Christ".

Ball's in your court. :)blackregiment

Calvinism is errant (e.g. the five solas, TULIP), but there is a difference between being in error and being unsaved (which, I note, is a charitable point that many Calvinists are unwilling to grant in the reverse direction; this was Crushmaster's undoing, for example). Some of Calvinism's tenets oppose Christ's teachings, if one analyzes those tenets and those teachings rationally...but this itself does not block the possibility that individual Calvinists can still be saved. All who strive to follow Christ, even though they may err, can be saved; that is the hope we bear. I don't believe I've said differently to this point.

You know, Saren was trying to save the galaxy. And America < galaxy, IIRC.

Or perhaps DJ Spock?

Wait...has anyone mentioned Captain America yet?

One could certainly forgiven for your assumption since many seem to think the Church is a building or an institution. Christ's Church on earth is not a building or an institution; it is the body of born again believers, in Christ. One must be careful not to confuse "people" with "bricks and mortar".blackregiment

I don't disagree that the concept of the Church as body is one correct interpretation of Scripture.

Are you talking about these traditions?

Year Tradition

431 Proclamation that infant baptism regenerates the soul.

500 The Mass instituted as re-sacrifice of Jesus for the remission of sin

593 Declaration that sin need to be purged, established by Pope Gregory I

600 Prayers directed to Mary, dead saints, and angels.

786 Worship of cross, images, and relics authorized.

995 Canonization of dead people as saints initiated by Pope John XV.

1000 Attendance at Mass made mandatory under the penalty of mortal sin.

1079 Celibacy of priesthood, decreed by Pope Gregory VII.

1090 Rosary, repetitious praying with beads, invented by Peter the Hermit.

1184 The Inquisitions, instituted by the Council of Verona.

1190 The sale of Indulgences established to reduce time in Purgatory.

1215 Transubstantiation, proclaimed by Pope Innocent III.

1215 Confession of sin to priests, instituted by Pope Innocent III.

1229 Bible placed on Index of Forbidden Books in Toulouse.

1438 Purgatory elevated from doctrine to dogma by Council of Florence.

1545 Tradition claimed equal in authority with the Bible by the Council of Trent.

1546 Apocryphal Books declared canon by Council of Trent.

1854 Immaculate Conception of Mary, proclaimed by Pope Pius IX.

1870 Infallibility of the Pope, proclaimed by Vatican Council.

1922 Virgin Mary proclaimed co-redeemer with Jesus by Pope Benedict XV.

1950 Assumption of Virgin Mary into heaven, proclaimed by Pope Pius XII.blackregiment

Bad table formatting aside, those would be some of the traditions, yes...the practice of all of which date back to the earliest days of the Church (as even a cursory reading of the Church Fathers will reveal).

Thanks for providing a handy reference list (okay, it's not exactly accurate, but even so) of when these ancient traditions were formally declared -- as opposed to being implicitly assumed -- to be intrinsic to Christian worship, in response to heretical teachings or as a countermeasure to grave evils in the world. It's a pity that people needed to be reminded that Mary was in fact assumed into Heaven, since even the earliest Christians knew that she had been...but there you go.

This list is, or could be read, as the Church apologizing for, and also correcting, the errors of various Protestant teachings.

Regarding assembling together, I'll just let Jesus answer that.

Mat 18:20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

By the way, I did not say that Christian fellowship is something we should not do, it is not a requirement of salvation however.

Regarding community worship, see my comment above.

Think what you want regarding my interpretations of Scripture, I am confident in the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and one thing is for certain, I will stand before the Lord to account for my faith, not before any man.blackregiment

So you are confident in the guidance of the Spirit and know yourself to be correct, but when the Church asserts that same guidance for herself, she's clearly telling a lie. Good to know. It never ceases to amaze me the infalibility that some Protestants will claim for themselves; it often far exceeds what the Church teaches about the Pope.

I'm glad that you're 100% right and incapable of error on this issue, blackregiment. Honestly, I am. You're head and shoulders above the rest of Christianity in being so.

As to your quote and follow-up not-quite-commentary, that is perhaps the most obvious verse you could have cited, though of course there are others. But let's cut to the chase, since all this chattering about attending worship at a church or not is, I suspect, primarily a reference to the Catholic teaching that voluntarily, and without good cause, missing the Mass is a mortal sin...which it is. But this isn't about the building, or even that much about the congregation assembled therein; it's about the Eucharist.

"When a person negligently "bags Mass," to go shopping, catch-up on work, sleep a few extra hours, attend a social event, or not interrupt vacation, the person is allowing something to take the place of God. Something becomes more valuable than the Holy Eucharist. Sadly, I have known families who could walk to the Church but choose not to attend Mass; ironically though, they send their children to the Catholic school. Yes, such behavior really is indicative of turning one's back on the Lord and committing a mortal sin."

Now, if you want to go off on a tangent about how the Eucharist is not the actual Real Presence of Christ, you are of course welcome. Of course, in so doing, you'd essentially be formally accusing Catholics of idolatry, and thus implying that Catholics are not saved. Which I believe is a TOS violation, is it not?

Ball's in your court.

Actually according to the Word of God, which is my guide, which Church one attends, or what denomination one belongs too, matters not. blackregiment

One could certainly be forgiven for assuming you felt different, based on both your personal treatment of people of certain other denominations, and the stance at least one of the unions you helped found takes toward at least one denomination I can think of.

The important thing is that one places their trust in Jesus Christ, alone, through His finished work on the cross as their Lord and Savior, and not in works of righteousness or the traditions of man. God's Word is very clear what one must do to be saved. One can be saved without ever setting foot in a Church building, Jesus Christ, not institutions, saves souls.blackregiment

Nothing you say is not true, yet the parts of what you say concerning the non-necessity of churches or sacred tradition (which, as a continuity in faith from the apostles and early Church Fathers, are separate from mere traditions of men) speak to what could be termed "lowest common denominator" faith. Yes, one needn't set foot in a church building, since the minimum requirement for salvation -- baptism -- can be performed anywhere, by any baptized Christian. But that is not the ideal of faith; we are called to participate far more than this baseline you illustrate and set out.

Rom 10:8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;

Rom 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

Rom 10:10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
1Ti 2:6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: itis the gift of God:

Eph 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Heb 9:11 But Christ being come a high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;
Heb 9:12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.
Heb 9:13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:
Heb 9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
Heb 9:15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

According to God's Word a Calvinist, a Catholic, or a person from any other denomination, that trusts in Christ alone for their salvation, in faith, will be saved.

Psa 118:8 It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man.blackregiment

Couldn't agree more (with Scripture, if not necessarily with you or your errant interpretations of it)...and yet I observe that you have ommitted mention of various verses of Scripture which call believers to gather in community to worship.

But as I suppose these would repudiate, though only in part, some of what you said above, the omissions are not unexpected.

Yeah I use female Shepard too. Hale is a way better voice actress. I always think most people use male Shepard though so I just refer to Shepard as he.Ace6301