• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Christian Dark Ages of Europe

sooda

Veteran Member
I do praise Rome for being strong on family values and anti-abortion.

I don't resent what you posted other than claiming Rome has the only Eucharist (which they withhold from "separated brethren"). If I need Rome's Eucharist to truly have fellowship with the Christ, why can't I take it, again? Because I'm in a false church, is that not so?

The real problem, Rome has a different gospel than the Bible. You've forgotten the last time I read through the Sermon on the Mount was at Mount of the Beatitudes (Catholic!) Church in The Galil, the difference is I see the Sermon as a proof that people don't keep the Law and need Christ's atonement, you read it as a checklist to get into Heaven, which means--you don't need Christ at all to get into Heaven. Can you explain THAT for me?

The Sermon on the Mount wasn't preached to Christians.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
Malleus Maleficarum - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malleus_Maleficarum
f9bbbf72.png

Overview
th

The Malleus Maleficarum, usually translated as the Hammer of Witches, is the best known and the most thorough treatise on witchcraft. It was written by the discredited Catholic clergyman Heinrich Kramer and first published in the German city of Speyer in 1487. It endorses extermination of witches and for this purpose develops a detailed legal and theological theory. It was a bestseller, second only to the Bible in terms of sales for almost 200 years. It has been described as the compendium of literature in demonology of the fifteenth century. The top theologians of the Inquisition at the Faculty of Colognecondemned the book a
Again, nothing in the period we (you) were talking about, viz. the period 450-1100 (post 41).
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
So you think it never happened, or what?
Of course it did. But it was nothing to do with the so-called Dark Ages.

You, it seems to me, are conflating several different things, in order to draw a bogus conclusion.

We have the fall of the Roman Empire and what seems, to some, like a period of regression in civilisation, from about 460 to about 1000 or so. This is what people generally mean by the Dark Ages, though in fact they were not nearly as dark as c.19th historians, raised on the study of Latin and Greek and admiration of ancient Rome, used to think. You originally claimed this regression was due to the baleful influence of the Church. But that's hogwash: it was to do with migrations of peoples and waves of invasions, as I have pointed out.

And then we have the mediaeval period from then to the Renaissance, which was anything but dark, as we have discussed, thanks largely to the learning and patronage of the Church. It was this period during which burnings of witches seem to have taken place.

So your OP statement that the Dark Ages were due to the "barriers to intellectual and moral development thrown up by Christianity" is completely misconceived:-

A) they weren't really dark,
B) to the extent they were, the issue was migrations and waves of invaders, not the church,
C) witch burning took place much later, during a period when the church was also making great contributions to art, culture and the advancement of human knowledge.
 
So your OP statement that the Dark Ages were due to the "barriers to intellectual and moral development thrown up by Christianity" is completely misconceived:-

People who state this as fact never seem to be able to answer the very simple question: "Name someone who was oppressed for their science during the medieval period?"
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
Many churches refer to the Eucharist as "communion", and that word means and implies "community". When groups split from the Church, they no longer were or are in "communion" with it.

False. The Church teaches that belief in God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit is #1, which is why all our prayers, including the Eucharistic prayers, are to God.

Secondly, the Gospel is what the Church has always taught as being important, and it is an undivided gospel. IOW, to say or imply that part if it is unimportant or of lesser importance is in violation of what Jesus taught and what the Church teaches. It is you, not I, that wants to ignore what Jesus mandated for us in the Sermon and elsewhere, thus trivializing the Gospel. IOW, it's essentially a "package deal" that indicates if one truly believes in Jesus and not just a couple of things about him.

And for you to say that the Church teaches that we "don't need Christ at all to get into Heaven" is categorically false, and the Catechism of the Catholic Church says as such. Maybe look things up instead of relying on falsehoods-- google can be a good friend if one uses it.

So, why do you persist in posting falsehoods while claiming to be a believer in Jesus? Why do you keep inventing this garbage, like above? Is this what your church is telling you is moral under Jesus' teachings? If so, then let me suggest you leave it and find a church that teaches the full Gospel-- not just a fraction of it.

I will address what you said, but I ask you to address what I said! ...That the true Eucharist, VITAL to salvation--"without this, you have NO part of me (John 6)" is WITHHELD by the true church from me, in other words, Rome condemns me to Hell or at least a long time in purgatory. That should bother both of us, should it not?

To address what you said--I'm aware that you believe Jesus saved you, and then you have to do all you can to maintain what He incepted. That goes against simple statements like Hebrews, where Jesus is the author and FINISHER of our faith! No one who has studied the Reformation misunderstands the Reformation was a struggle between sola fide and Roman works. And every time we discuss this, you bring up passages including the Sermon on the Mount to TRY TO GET ME TO DO MORE WORKS TOWARD SALVATION. I don't understand why we're arguing!
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
The Sermon on the Mount wasn't preached to Christians.

Christian literally means "follower of/disciple of Christ". There were people at that Sermon who'd literally followed Him to see miracles and receive healings. What are you speaking of?
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
I will address what you said, but I ask you to address what I said! ...That the true Eucharist, VITAL to salvation--"without this, you have NO part of me (John 6)" is WITHHELD by the true church from me, in other words, Rome condemns me to Hell or at least a long time in purgatory. That should bother both of us, should it not?

To address what you said--I'm aware that you believe Jesus saved you, and then you have to do all you can to maintain what He incepted. That goes against simple statements like Hebrews, where Jesus is the author and FINISHER of our faith! No one who has studied the Reformation misunderstands the Reformation was a struggle between sola fide and Roman works. And every time we discuss this, you bring up passages including the Sermon on the Mount to TRY TO GET ME TO DO MORE WORKS TOWARD SALVATION. I don't understand why we're arguing!
Then let's not argue and, btw, there's no such thing as "Roman works" except for those who work out of anti-Catholic bigotry.

Goodbye, and maybe do some actual studying on Catholicism instead of fabricating or parroting falsehoods. If your church teaches you that this is somehow moral, then maybe seek another church that actually teaches Jesus' Love and Truth and not hate-filled bigotry.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
Christian literally means "follower of/disciple of Christ". There were people at that Sermon who'd literally followed Him to see miracles and receive healings. What are you speaking of?

Christian literally means "follower of/disciple of Christ". There were people at that Sermon who'd literally followed Him to see miracles and receive healings. What are you speaking of?

Jews.sermon on the mount was very early in Jesus minsistry.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
Christian literally means "follower of/disciple of Christ". There were people at that Sermon who'd literally followed Him to see miracles and receive healings. What are you speaking of?

Christian literally means "follower of/disciple of Christ". There were people at that Sermon who'd literally followed Him to see miracles and receive healings. What are you speaking of?

Jews.sermon on the mount was very early in Jesus minsistry.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
Christian literally means "follower of/disciple of Christ". There were people at that Sermon who'd literally followed Him to see miracles and receive healings. What are you speaking of?

Christian literally means "follower of/disciple of Christ". There were people at that Sermon who'd literally followed Him to see miracles and receive healings. What are you speaking of?

Jews.sermon on the mount was very early in Jesus minstistry.
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
Then let's not argue and, btw, there's no such thing as "Roman works" except for those who work out of anti-Catholic bigotry.

Goodbye, and maybe do some actual studying on Catholicism instead of fabricating or parroting falsehoods. If your church teaches you that this is somehow moral, then maybe seek another church that actually teaches Jesus' Love and Truth and not hate-filled bigotry.

Of course there are Roman works, not being Roman, I can never do these, according to Rome:

* Cana wedding
* Extreme unction
* Confirmation
* Etc., etc. including indulgences and mass . . .

Your church teaches that you must do works to hope for Heaven. My understanding of the NT is Jesus sets people free from all that.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
Christian literally means "follower of/disciple of Christ". There were people at that Sermon who'd literally followed Him to see miracles and receive healings. What are you speaking of?

Jesus didn't preach to the Gentiles, except for the Samaritan woman at the well.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Your church teaches that you must do works to hope for Heaven. My understanding of the NT is Jesus sets people free from all that.
Romans 6[16]Do you not know that if you yield yourselves to any one as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death (Gr.—eis thanaton, “unto death”), or of obedience, which leads to righteousness.

Romans 8[1-14]There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus… who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit… and those who are in the flesh cannot please God… So, then, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh – for if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body you will live. For all who are led by the Spirit of God are the sons of God.

Romans 11[22] Note then the kindness and severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off.

Galatians 6[7] (6:7) Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap. For he who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption (eternal death); but he who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life. And let us not grow weary in well-doing, for in due season we shall reap, if we do not lose heart.

Ephesians 2[10] For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

James 2[24] You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Matthew 12[36-37]I tell you, on the day of judgment men will render account for every careless word they utter; for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.



What you are conflating is "works under the law" versus doing the good works that Jesus commands us to do.
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
Romans 6[16]Do you not know that if you yield yourselves to any one as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death (Gr.—eis thanaton, “unto death”), or of obedience, which leads to righteousness.

Romans 8[1-14]There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus… who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit… and those who are in the flesh cannot please God… So, then, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh – for if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body you will live. For all who are led by the Spirit of God are the sons of God.

Romans 11[22] Note then the kindness and severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off.

Galatians 6[7] (6:7) Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap. For he who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption (eternal death); but he who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life. And let us not grow weary in well-doing, for in due season we shall reap, if we do not lose heart.

Ephesians 2[10] For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

James 2[24] You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Matthew 12[36-37]I tell you, on the day of judgment men will render account for every careless word they utter; for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.



What you are conflating is "works under the law" versus doing the good works that Jesus commands us to do.

Jesus does not command us to do good works to be saved, He commands those who are saved to do good works.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Jesus does not command us to do good works to be saved, He commands those who are saved to do good works.
Why does you church apparently teach you to ignore what's actually found in the Bible, such as I posted in post #75? Maybe you should seek out a denomination that actually teaches what the Bible says on this and other things. Basically what they are teaching you is the position that the "Goats" were not doing in the Parable of the Sheep & Goats (Matthew 25) that Jesus condemned. They believed some things about Jesus, but not fully in Jesus.
Jesus does not command us to do good works to be saved, He commands those who are saved to do good works.
That's like saying "I believe in Jesus but I don't have to do what he says", which is the position that the "Goats" took in Jesus' "Parable of the Sheep & Goats" (Matthew 25) who Jesus condemned. Instead, let me recommend that you find a church that teaches the full Gospel, as most churches do.
 
Did someone do science during that time?

Well technically natural philosophy, no one really did science until 18th/19th C. It's not meant as a semantic trick though.

In layman's terms, yes people did science, and, despite the popular assumption it wasn't repressed.
 
Top