The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

I'd just like to remind everyone that it's ok to discuss and debate within the body of Christ, but please don't argue. It's not edifying, especially on a public forum like this where anyone can see what we're saying. We want to be an exemplary witness to the world! :smile:


In response to the whole "image of God" thing - I was under the impression that it was, as some have pointed out, a spiritual and emotional likeness, rather than a physical one. John 4 says that God the Father is spirit, after all.


Hmm, I think the thing I'm looking forward to most about Christ's return (except Christ returning, ofc :smile: ) is having a pet lion. I'm going to call him Moses and we're going to ride around playing gigs and worshipping Jesus! Yeah! :smile:
Original post by yawn
The guy's personal extended thoughts on 'Man, in the image of God' are interesting, couched as they are on the 'angled mirror' analogy.

"The dignity of the human person is rooted in his or her creation in the image and likeness of God. Endowed with a spiritual and immortal soul, intelligence and free will, the human person is ordered to God and called in soul and in body to eternal beatitude." Compendium of the CCC - 358

We could all, if we thought about it, expand on the consequences of the above. However, it doesn't detract from the basic explanation is what separates mankind from the rest of God's creation...ensoulment...and the subject of the video (Mr. Wright) makes this clear.


I wouldn't say it's ensoulment. :wink: Nephesh, for example, which I understand to be the primary Hebrew word for soul, is applied to humans and animals. I think the Imago Dei is a relationalist rather than substantialist/essentialist category.
Original post by rainbowbex
oh, i doubt he goes to the cu, i meant he's at jesus college.


Oh OK :redface: I'll revise that to 'know of him' rather than 'know him', in that case!
Original post by dreiviergrenadier
I'm at Christ Church, doing Law with LSE (currently doing the LSE bit), but i've been to Queen's quite a bit as my girlfriend's there. So if you see someone next year who regularly stands outside the main entrance, it may well be me :smile:

Also, does the CU have a physics faculty group? The current Christ Church rep is a physicist (and maybe even one of the freshers too).

How've you found it so far?



It does - but I think it only managed to meet once during last term :tongue:

I have to admit I don't know any Christian fresher physicists - I've spotted one or two people at church/cu meetings from lectures, but I've never talked to one! Hopefully the faculty group will manage to meet a little more this term....

I'm finding it good - most of the time! At the moment I have about 1.5 times the normal workload for a physicist, so things are quite hectic, but hopefully that should calm down in a few weeks.

I'm finding my college CU and church (St. Ebbe's) really good though :smile:
Reply 2844
Original post by Calumcalum
I wouldn't say it's ensoulment. :wink: Nephesh, for example, which I understand to be the primary Hebrew word for soul, is applied to humans and animals. I think the Imago Dei is a relationalist rather than substantialist/essentialist category.


If we're going to be pedantic, then yes, every living thing has a soul.

Plants have vegetative souls which are capable of life and growth, animals have sensitive souls - capable of life, growth, and feeling, and humans have rational souls which are capable of life, growth, feeling, and rational thought.

Apart from the differing capabilities, it is only the last kind that survives death since only it is made of spirit; souls of plants and animals are made of matter and die when they die. It is the human soul with it's attributes that is capable of having a relationship with God which makes us created in the image of God. Is that succinct enough for you? :wink:

I had thought that my original post on the matter made that clear? :confused:

Edit: See my post #2771

Originally Posted by d123
:facepalm:

I'm sure I've mentioned this before, but 'image of God' does not mean that we look like God, or conversely, that he looks like us. Let's say that evolution didn't happen - does that mean that God is a guy in the sky with the beard? I doubt you'd make that conclusion. The doctine of 'imago dei' does not mean that we resemble God physically at all.


yawn
Indeed. What it does mean is that, of all God's creation, it is only mankind that is able to share a relationship with God.


Yes...I do remember talking about exactly that which you subscribe to. Two Christians in total agreement...great!
(edited 13 years ago)
Original post by yawn
If we're going to be pedantic, then yes, every living thing has a soul.

Plants have vegetative souls which are capable of life and growth, animals have sensitive souls - capable of life, growth, and feeling, and humans have rational souls which are capable of life, growth, feeling, and rational thought.

Apart from the differing capabilities, it is only the last kind that survives death since only it is made of spirit; souls of plants and animals are made of matter and die when they die. It is the human soul with it's attributes that is capable of having a relationship with God which makes us created in the image of God. Is that succinct enough for you? :wink:

I had thought that my original post on the matter made that clear? :confused:

Edit: See my post #2771


Definitely clearer; thanks for that distinction. :smile:

That's not to say I'm convinced though. :tongue:
Original post by Annoying-Mouse
Just finished reading the last couple of pages and I'm impressed. But, to be honest I think you're wasting your time. He just doesn't seem to be accepting the statements or even tackling any statements you're making and just resolves to posting more verses from the scripture with additional commentary at the end.

Anyway, I often hear some Christians say that they communicate with God, have a personal relationship with him and such. I was wondering what exactly do you mean by this? I realise this is the Christain society but this seems fairly active at the moment and it might move the thread forward from evolution.


I have considered the statements that have been said, but I am fundamentally opposed to them. Many of the people who have posted on this forum are evidently more biased for science than Christ as they never mention His word or that of the prophets. Also, they do not accept my statements on the idea that life is a test, nor do they 'tackle' them.

All faithful Christians have a relationship with God, and speaking to him is of course possible. I am not saying a mutal conversation can occur; after prayers, you are able to simply confess sins, state your worries, etc. to God. But I would likely laugh if someone said that God spoke to them.
Original post by Annoying-Mouse
Just finished reading the last couple of pages and I'm impressed. But, to be honest I think you're wasting your time. He just doesn't seem to be accepting the statements or even tackling any statements you're making and just resolves to posting more verses from the scripture with additional commentary at the end.

Anyway, I often hear some Christians say that they communicate with God, have a personal relationship with him and such. I was wondering what exactly do you mean by this? I realise this is the Christain society but this seems fairly active at the moment and it might move the thread forward from evolution.


You're impressed, I'm irritated. lol.

What do we mean by a personal relationship and what do we mean by communication with God.

Hmm, I guess personal relationship in the sense that the interaction I have with God is more than just chatting away in my head at some distant guy in the sky. I will talk to him, but also I feel he will chat on back, not always in a 'words' way but sometimes in a thoughts or feelings way. Some people would describe it as 'nudges' some people do hear words. Some people describe it as a gut feeling, some people a mixture of these things.

Through these interactions, through worship, through prayer and through reading the bible, we come to know more about God's nature.

It is, I suppose, similar to when you come to know a new human individual, the more time you spend with them, the better you come to know them, and you have a personal relationship with them.

Make sense? I'm sorry if I'm not explaining it very well.. if only I could send meaning in non-literary thoughts *sigh*
Original post by wind-swept
It does - but I think it only managed to meet once during last term :tongue:

I have to admit I don't know any Christian fresher physicists - I've spotted one or two people at church/cu meetings from lectures, but I've never talked to one! Hopefully the faculty group will manage to meet a little more this term....

I'm finding it good - most of the time! At the moment I have about 1.5 times the normal workload for a physicist, so things are quite hectic, but hopefully that should calm down in a few weeks.

I'm finding my college CU and church (St. Ebbe's) really good though :smile:


I think that's about normal, i've only been to the law group about 3 times in two years!

How come the workload is so heavy atm?

I think Queen's has a really good CU; they had some great reps last year (i'm sure they still do...), and it seems to be full of some fairly creative people. What made you choose Ebbes over Aldates?
Reply 2849
It's an interesting question, about how far we have a personal relationship with God. I know people who say they've heard the voice of God, but it's never happened to me - at least not explicitly. I tend to feel that God speaks to us through other people some of the time, and sometimes, I feel his presence more strongly than at other times, but this could just be a feeling that I attribute to the presence of God. I suppose as rainbowbex says, it's sometimes more in the sense of feeling 'nudges' rather than words. Or feeling a hand on your shoulder. It's difficult to vocalise and to put into human language.
Original post by King_Duncan
Oh OK :redface: I'll revise that to 'know of him' rather than 'know him', in that case!


I knew someone in Jesus' CU, but they left last year. How long have you been there?
Original post by rainbowbex
You're impressed, I'm irritated. lol.


:frown: Sorry...

I do think though that we, as Christians, need to learn to argue with each other in the proper spirit (bear in mind that the early Church argued very fiercely!), and that your presence here might be needed to nudge us closer to having more brotherly/sisterly arguments - a presence we clearly desperately need!
Original post by Alex-jc123
I have considered the statements that have been said, but I am fundamentally opposed to them. Many of the people who have posted on this forum are evidently more biased for science than Christ as they never mention His word or that of the prophets. Also, they do not accept my statements on the idea that life is a test, nor do they 'tackle' them.

All faithful Christians have a relationship with God, and speaking to him is of course possible. I am not saying a mutal conversation can occur; after prayers, you are able to simply confess sins, state your worries, etc. to God. But I would likely laugh if someone said that God spoke to them.


How dare you. How dare you.

I kindly request that you cease to post such disharmonious responses in this thread, in the TSR Christian society. Challenge to what we believe is fine, but the rude, inconsiderate manner in which you are doing it is unacceptable. If you can post sensibly, then continue. As already stated this is NOT a thread in which to stir arguement, it is a thread to encourage and share our faith in. Telling people that their faith is wrong because it is different to yours is unacceptable in this place.

You are upsetting a lot of people. From what I have witnessed you are not acting in a manner to be likened to a man of God.

I hope that you do come to understand that God isn't just someone you talk to. He is someome who talks back. My prayers have been answered, even those that seem trivial.

I am praying for you, because whether you irritate me or insult me etc, God still loves you.
Original post by dreiviergrenadier
:frown: Sorry...

I do think though that we, as Christians, need to learn to argue with each other in the proper spirit (bear in mind that the early Church argued very fiercely!), and that your presence here might be needed to nudge us closer to having more brotherly/sisterly arguments - a presence we clearly desperately need!



if you see my earlier post (back a couple of pages) You'll see that is what I was trying to do.

debate is fine, but belittling each other etc etc, isn't, it's not loving, it's not encouraging and nobody learns or grows from it.

But thank you, I never really went anyway :smile:
Original post by Alex-jc123
I have considered the statements that have been said, but I am fundamentally opposed to them. Many of the people who have posted on this forum are evidently more biased for science than Christ as they never mention His word or that of the prophets. Also, they do not accept my statements on the idea that life is a test, nor do they 'tackle' them.

But I would likely laugh if someone said that God spoke to them.


What is that person were, say, Jeremiah?

I think one of the problems we're having in this discussion is that you see a sharp divide between being pro-science and pro-Christ, whereas those who disagree with you don't. I think it's possible (actually, i think it's currently necessary) for christians to be ardently pro-science because they are pro-Christ. It doesn't mean that we think science is more 'true' than God, but it does mean that we think science is a valid and important method for gathering knowledge about the universe we live in.

As for the Genesis story, i don't think anyone is saying that they have dismissed it because of evolution. When i was a bit younger, i didn't believe in evolution, and i still didn't think that Genesis was a historical account. We have a different view of Genesis because of the way we think we ought to interpret our Scriptures.

As for life being a test, i think what Calum seems to be saying (and i'd agree) is that while it is important to test your faith (as we can see from the verses you quoted), that doesn't mean that the whole point of our life is to be tested. Being tested is something that happens in life, not the point of life.

Do you think that those who disagree with you on this topic are still Christians?
Original post by rainbowbex
if you see my earlier post (back a couple of pages) You'll see that is what I was trying to do.

debate is fine, but belittling each other etc etc, isn't, it's not loving, it's not encouraging and nobody learns or grows from it.

But thank you, I never really went anyway :smile:


:smile: I think the problem, for me at least, is that when i'm arguing a point, i find it much easier to focus on the point itself, rather than the person i'm arguing it with, and so i lose sight of where the 'line' is, and whether or not i'm crossing it.
Reply 2856
A question - does anyone know of any good Lent reflections? Either online, or books, or podcasts. Anything really - just something that can help guide reflection and thought throughout Lent. I know it's still a fair while away now though!
Reply 2857
Original post by dreiviergrenadier
:smile: I think the problem, for me at least, is that when i'm arguing a point, i find it much easier to focus on the point itself, rather than the person i'm arguing it with, and so i lose sight of where the 'line' is, and whether or not i'm crossing it.


I have this issue too, especially on the internet, where it's more easy to make a stronger case for what you're saying than in real life. I'm going to try to keep out of such debates in future - I just find it difficult sometimes when the issue is something I'm fairly passionate about, but as has been said, this thread isn't really the place for such debates.
Original post by dreiviergrenadier
:smile: I think the problem, for me at least, is that when i'm arguing a point, i find it much easier to focus on the point itself, rather than the person i'm arguing it with, and so i lose sight of where the 'line' is, and whether or not i'm crossing it.


There is nothing wrong with arguing a point, I think the argument over the last day or so started well, but I think the point to be remembered is that yes, consider each other's arguments - everyone see's things differently and you might find you learn something, and to secondly remember that there is a point where you should let things drop. There is nothing to 'win' and that is what I feel the discussion started to turn into.

Original post by d123
I have this issue too, especially on the internet, where it's more easy to make a stronger case for what you're saying than in real life. I'm going to try to keep out of such debates in future - I just find it difficult sometimes when the issue is something I'm fairly passionate about, but as has been said, this thread isn't really the place for such debates.


See above, debating isn't the issue, it's the way it's done. We can debate to encourage, without debating to win a point, or win an argument, and I feel the recent discussion swung towards the latter.

God Bless

EDIT: I only hope that I have not come across as dismissive or disinterested in peoples personal belief's an arguments, what I disagree with is saying that one persons stance is right and the other is wrong. surely the most important and fundamental thing is faith and belief in Jesus Christ.. the way truth and life.....
(edited 13 years ago)
Reply 2859
I guess these are pretty uncomfortable questions..which are hardly vacuous...hopefully some of you so-called christians will ponder on them and maybe might lead you to finding your own nirvana..

+ve rep for me pls :smile:



Original post by Calumcalum
Christians don't see the Bible in the same way as Muslims see the Qur'an. Translations thus count as the Bible. (Though I do have a Greek NT I use for serious study).



None, but we try.



Probably none.



And 'be perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect', sure.



Forgiven*, not forgotten.



This is pretty vacuous.