Lefty

Church Buildings: Why do they exist?

Recommended Posts

Why to Church buildings exist?

 

Because throughout human history any group of people with a common interest have met at common places, usually buildings.

 

Pagan folks meet in pagan temples, Jews meet in synagogues, soldiers meet in barracks, Christians meet in Churches, tennis players meet at the tennis club house and so on and so forth.

 

Ex Christians meet in a virtual building apparently *Looks around* Why? Because people with common interests meet in common places.

 

That's my  cent worth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, LogicalFallacy said:

That's my  cent worth.

That makes perfect cents.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, florduh said:

That makes perfect cents.

 

Yes.  I enjoy the dime we all spend together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Yes.  I enjoy the dime we all spend together.

Hope and change. I just coined that phrase. Still in mint condition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, florduh said:

Hope and change. I just coined that phrase. Still in mint condition.

If you want a pun war, I will offer no quarter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

If you want a pun war, I will offer no quarter.

Nor I the obverse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, mwc said:

     The word made flesh.  Not the word made the gospel of John or the the bible.  If he's made flesh then that's where it ends...flesh.  How does that then become written text if it's not commanded to become written text?  How does this fleshy word become written word?

 

          mwc

 

 

Well, that would take interpretation, given that the word(s) presented (pun intended) are allegory or metaphor (I'm not sure which, but in either case they are infected with woo woo).  Usually, a competition develops between and among those who take up that interpretive challenge.  It's often entertaining to observe, although sometimes it's quite boring.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, mwc said:

     The word made flesh.  Not the word made the gospel of John or the the bible.  If he's made flesh then that's where it ends...flesh.  How does that then become written text if it's not commanded to become written text?  How does this fleshy word become written word?

 

          mwc

 

 

What makes you think that's where it ends once "...he's made flesh"? That requires you to make as much an interpretation as anybody. And what makes you think that it was not commanded to become written text? How do you come to the conclusion "this fleshly word become written word"? My reading of the text tells me that it says the word was in the beginning and later was made flesh "...and dwelt among us...".

 

I never said any of this makes cents. 😎

 

I'm just relating my understanding of their story as I have read it. Besides, this is about my questioning of the church building concept.

 

What you are doing is the primary thing I have always hated most about way too many atheists. And now that I myself am an atheist, I find it even more aggravating. I find it immature and as they say..."unprofitable and vain".

 

If you want their explanation, ask them because I really have no desire to get into any debate with a fellow non-believer. You're coming across as wanting to ask for provocation reasons, I guess because you're bored maybe? As I have said, I don't care to play that game of yours. I would venture you are more interested in asking than actually engaging in reasonable dialog.

 

It's simple to sit back and toss out question after question when you no doubt have your own understanding. How about you offer some explanations. How could Christians end up with the church system based on what is written in their own bible texts? Where in the text does it say to build church buildings and hold services?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, LogicalFallacy said:

Why to Church buildings exist?

 

Because throughout human history any group of people with a common interest have met at common places, usually buildings.

 

Pagan folks meet in pagan temples, Jews meet in synagogues, soldiers meet in barracks, Christians meet in Churches, tennis players meet at the tennis club house and so on and so forth.

 

Ex Christians meet in a virtual building apparently *Looks around* Why? Because people with common interests meet in common places.

 

That's my  cent worth.

 

You and I understand that about humans, but that doesn't mean what Christians do is actually doctrinal. My claim is that it is not doctrinal but rather a concept made up for reasons other than doctrine and in contradiction to what their book tells them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/14/2019 at 11:51 AM, mwc said:

     Jesus wasn't impressed?  That's a high bar.  Jesus wasn't impressed by neither jack nor shit.  So that rules out everything in all of life.  I can't think of a single time where it is said jesus was impressed.  I don't know if jesus even mildy enjoyed anything.  He was rather dour.  He hated on fig trees that didn't give figs out of season.  I really don't know if he could be impressed.

 

     Having said that I also don't recall anything about saying the temple shouldn't exist.  I know there were things about how it wouldn't exist but that's not the same thing.

 

     But, I do agree that many people are more proud of their buildings that their mission.  But people without buildings can also use that as a source of pride just as well.  To show how they're doing things so much better, more correct, than those in the buildings.

 

           mwc

 

 

My apologies mwc.

 

I have felt frustrated at our conversion, and so I went back and read again what has been posted. My reply to this post is where I claimed you were being difficult. Reading back, I see that I misread what you had posted. I was feeling you were intentionally trying to "toss question after question..." when I see now that I didn't stay focused on understanding your point. You were not being difficult. You actually agreed with my point and simply added an observation of human pride. I had difficulty in reading comprehension. Please accept my apology. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Lefty said:

 

My apologies mwc.

 

Bah, MWC doesn't believe NZ exists, therefore he probably doesn't believe you exist, therefore he's been arguing with himself.

 

Now with that astounding line of reasoning I am off to bed :D 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, LogicalFallacy said:

 

Bah, MWC doesn't believe NZ exists, therefore he probably doesn't believe you exist, therefore he's been arguing with himself.

 

Now with that astounding line of reasoning I am off to bed :D 

     I still enjoy chatting with all of you, my imaginary friends, so I won't reason you away...yet.

 

          mwc

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lefty said:

 

My apologies mwc.

 

I have felt frustrated at our conversion, and so I went back and read again what has been posted. My reply to this post is where I claimed you were being difficult. Reading back, I see that I misread what you had posted. I was feeling you were intentionally trying to "toss question after question..." when I see now that I didn't stay focused on understanding your point. You were not being difficult. You actually agreed with my point and simply added an observation of human pride. I had difficulty in reading comprehension. Please accept my apology. 

     No need to apologize.  But I will accept it nonetheless.

 

          mwc

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lefty said:

 

What makes you think that's where it ends once "...he's made flesh"? That requires you to make as much an interpretation as anybody. And what makes you think that it was not commanded to become written text? How do you come to the conclusion "this fleshly word become written word"? My reading of the text tells me that it says the word was in the beginning and later was made flesh "...and dwelt among us...".

 

I never said any of this makes cents. 😎

 

I'm just relating my understanding of their story as I have read it. Besides, this is about my questioning of the church building concept.

 

What you are doing is the primary thing I have always hated most about way too many atheists. And now that I myself am an atheist, I find it even more aggravating. I find it immature and as they say..."unprofitable and vain".

 

If you want their explanation, ask them because I really have no desire to get into any debate with a fellow non-believer. You're coming across as wanting to ask for provocation reasons, I guess because you're bored maybe? As I have said, I don't care to play that game of yours. I would venture you are more interested in asking than actually engaging in reasonable dialog.

 

It's simple to sit back and toss out question after question when you no doubt have your own understanding. How about you offer some explanations. How could Christians end up with the church system based on what is written in their own bible texts? Where in the text does it say to build church buildings and hold services?

     You should read what you've said here and apply it to the church buildings.  Nowhere is it actually stated that anything should be written down but something was clearly written down (whether it is a fact or a fiction doesn't matter).  And nowhere is it stated (in those same documents) that church buildings should be built but church buildings were clearly built.  You then ask "And what makes you think that it was not commanded to become written text?"  Just substitute building churches in there to find your answer.  It would have to be extra-biblical if you require an explicit command exactly how the texts themselves came to exist without explicit biblical command (since such command would be present in the texts).

 

     I already offered an explanation.  It's an evolution of the temple/synagogue system that was already in-place.  There's no need for a specific command when it's just a way of life.  I would be more inclined to question why church buildings if meeting places of a type were specifically forbidden but they're not.

 

          mwc

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, mwc said:

 I already offered an explanation.

 

Yes, you did. Thank you.

 

So, I THINK it appears we are on the same page then, that it is not written in the biblical text. That would then mean people did such things of their own accord outside of doctrine, which is my whole point.

 

I honestly cannot say, though I have indeed made the accusations, yet I don't know what each person's intent was when somebody started promoting meeting in a building rather than going house to house. As you say, believers of religion were already meeting in a set location in various religions. It may well be that they felt it was a better way to draw people in seeing people were already meeting at huge stone monoliths, etc in the pagan religions, as well as the Jewish temples. That falls in line with my contention that the church grew to become just like the world, which their own book tells them to avoid. Christians may have changed their religion from something pagan but they never separated from the world and those buildings are just one example of that lack of separation.

 

To me, it appears as another case of men making things up as they went along, and that is my point. With the Jewish temple, at least there are clear rules to temple worship. No such rules exist in Christianity. It's a personal meeting kind of thing and the temple is the individual believer. It is likely at some point somebody said they need a bigger house to meet in, and off they went. Out of that came what we see today, but what we have today should not exist. It's become a fraud just like the religion itself, in my humble opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lefty said:

 

Yes, you did. Thank you.

 

So, I THINK it appears we are on the same page then, that it is not written in the biblical text. That would then mean people did such things of their own accord outside of doctrine, which is my whole point.

 

I honestly cannot say, though I have indeed made the accusations, yet I don't know what each person's intent was when somebody started promoting meeting in a building rather than going house to house. As you say, believers of religion were already meeting in a set location in various religions. It may well be that they felt it was a better way to draw people in seeing people were already meeting at huge stone monoliths, etc in the pagan religions, as well as the Jewish temples. That falls in line with my contention that the church grew to become just like the world, which their own book tells them to avoid. Christians may have changed their religion from something pagan but they never separated from the world and those buildings are just one example of that lack of separation.

 

To me, it appears as another case of men making things up as they went along, and that is my point. With the Jewish temple, at least there are clear rules to temple worship. No such rules exist in Christianity. It's a personal meeting kind of thing and the temple is the individual believer. It is likely at some point somebody said they need a bigger house to meet in, and off they went. Out of that came what we see today, but what we have today should not exist. It's become a fraud just like the religion itself, in my humble opinion.

     Well, I'd like to say more since I've been the one annoying you the most one this topic but I'm out of time due to other obligations.  Anyhow, as I recall the disciples, in the Acts, went to the temple to pray.  Now, I know, you pointed out jesus wasn't impressed but that didn't seem to stop them.  It at least creates a plausible chain of events for the evolution I have in mind especially if we accept all the traditional dates and times as well as the accepted uses for these spaces.  Once the war comes and things are destroyed they need alternatives so they turn elsewhere.  Once they grow they gain money, power and influence and build their own spaces which are xian temples or churches.  Had Israel been restored early on this may not have occurred.

 

     Nowhere in the texts do I ever see any of these same disciples reading or writing.  There's not even a precedent for it.  Nothing to evolve.  No command.  Nothing.  But the texts magically appear and, now, along with that we're debating whether they allow for churches since these same texts which don't specifically state that they themselves should even exist should allow for church buildings.  So what is not specifically stated in these texts, including the texts themselves, just should not be is the end result.

 

     I'll try to respond as I can, as I say since I have these other obligations now getting in my way, so don't take it personally if my participation around the site is spotty.

 

          mwc

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Understand, thanks. I'm starting to see where you are going with this. It is a bit tricky at least for me to articulate in print what is racing through my mind, but I do understand it's quite the puzzle you are touching on in proving something from text itself that shouldn't exist. Interesting angle that I haven't fully thought about much. I'm curious how it all plays out in the bigger picture of showing the fraud of religion in general.

 

I look forward to more! 👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...