Can You Be Christian And Straight Edge?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xCAMIx

if I buy a Sex Pistol's CD, then say Sid's a genious for the bass lines he made,

---

best joke ever

The irony is that sid couldnt play bass and the guitarist played bass on never mind the bullocs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SgtD

so you didn't read it too closely did you?

1. you say you are sxe. therefore you think drinking is wrong.
2. you are christian, and think that god is flawless, however jesus drank wine.
3. jesus drank wine-> he can't be flawless like you say. that's the contradiction

---

Who said the wine that Jesus drank contained alcohol? I have no proof, but most wine back in those times contained no alcohol. Maybe? Possibly?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Old_Man_sxe

Who said the wine that Jesus drank contained alcohol? I have no proof, but most wine back in those times contained no alcohol. Maybe? Possibly?

---

because contextually there's no reason to believe it didn't. Most wine back then did contain alcohol, that's what made it wine. Jesus makes the distinction between himself and John the baptist. Jesus drank alcohol and John the Baptist didn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsecx

because contextually there's no reason to believe it didn't. Most wine back then did contain alcohol, that's what made it wine. Jesus makes the distinction between himself and John the baptist. Jesus drank alcohol and John the Baptist didn't.

---

I have to disagree that alcohol made the wine. Wine that is freshly pressed contains no alcohol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Old_Man_sxe

I have to disagree that alcohol made the wine. Wine that is freshly pressed contains no alcohol.

---

liquid that is freshly pressed isn't wine. it's juice. it doesn't become wine until it's fermented. Like I said traditionally there is no reason to believe, like in the instance of the wedding at galea that the wine that jesus created wasn't alcoholic, as it was tradition. Wine at the last supper? Still alcoholic today in passover.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsecx

liquid that is freshly pressed isn't wine. it's juice. it doesn't become wine until it's fermented. Like I said traditionally there is no reason to believe, like in the instance of the wedding at galea that the wine that jesus created wasn't alcoholic, as it was tradition. Wine at the last supper? Still alcoholic today in passover.

---

Grape juice was referred to as wine in those times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Old_Man_sxe

Grape juice was referred to as wine in those times.

---

it was refered to as oinos which can mean both, but typically implies alcohol. Now if you want to provide some supporting evidence as to why the wine definitely wasn't alcoholic, then go for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsecx

it was refered to as oinos which can mean both, but typically implies alcohol. Now if you want to provide some supporting evidence as to why the wine definitely wasn't alcoholic, then go for it.

---

I already stated my theory with "freshly pressed”, but I wasn't there. I doubt anyone is going to prove it was alcohol or non-alcohol, based on actual fact.

So Christians can be sxe? Possibly?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Old_Man_sxe

I already stated my theory with "freshly pressed”, but I wasn't there. I doubt anyone is going to prove it was alcohol or non-alcohol, based on actual fact.

So Christians can be sxe? Possibly?

---

based on traditions, based on what's written Jesus drank alcoholic wine. The only people who disagree with this are ones that want to change history and change the bible to condemn alcohol consumption period, even though the bible is very clear that getting drunk is a sin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsecx

based on traditions, based on what's written Jesus drank alcoholic wine. .

---

You'll have to provide a reference, I'm not aware of anything written that the wine Jesus drank was alcohol wine.

My opinion is no bibical scholar is going to waste his/her time on this kind of research.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Old_Man_sxe

You'll have to provide a reference, I'm not aware of anything written that the wine Jesus drank was alcohol wine.

My opinion is no bibical scholar is going to waste his/her time on this kind of research.

---

http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=988

you do realize that there are entire BOOKS written on the topic right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsecx

http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=988

you do realize that there are entire BOOKS written on the topic right?

---

Nope I didn't realize there was............anyways:


Yes Jesus did turn water into wine, but did he drink that wine? It does not say in John. More importantly…..what the waiter is talking about is what happens traditionally at these feasts (drank--> not drank freely as per KJV). Where does it say that he was going to serve the bad wine at that moment? There is no base here for factual. Its a weak argument they make. I don’t find any support here that Jesus drank alcoholic wine. Plus they are using a revised bible that I don’t agree with or find very accurate.

i really don't see why everyone gets all bent out of shape over people who are edge also being christians. you won't change our beliefs...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Old_Man_sxe

Nope I didn't realize there was............anyways:


Yes Jesus did turn water into wine, but did he drink that wine? It does not say in John. More importantly…..what the waiter is talking about is what happens traditionally at these feasts (drank--> not drank freely as per KJV). Where does it say that he was going to serve the bad wine at that moment? There is no base here for factual. Its a weak argument they make. I don’t find any support here that Jesus drank alcoholic wine. Plus they are using a revised bible that I don’t agree with or find very accurate.

---

Even if you want to use that as an argument, jesus is still condoning the drinking of the wine, and you're still contradicting god and telling him that he is wrong, so the issue still remains.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by collin

i really don't see why everyone gets all bent out of shape over people who are edge also being christians. you won't change our beliefs...

---

because people are either being shitty edge kids, or shitty christians.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsecx

Even if you want to use that as an argument, jesus is still condoning the drinking of the wine, and you're still contradicting god and telling him that he is wrong, so the issue still remains.

---

I thought the debate was that Jesus drank alcohol via wine.

I don't see the condoning of alcohol via wine. There is no proof that the water turned to wine was alcoholic. A waiter talking about traditions at past feasts does not prove anything to support that argument.

I don't belive in the Trinity. Jesus was the son of God.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Old_Man_sxe

I thought the debate was that Jesus drank alcohol via wine.

I don't see the condoning of alcohol via wine. There is no proof that the water turned to wine was alcoholic. A waiter talking about traditions at past feasts does not prove anything to support that argument.

I don't belive in the Trinity. Jesus was the son of God.

---

the debate is blasphemy of the lord. the scripture is pretty clear that the wine in question was alcoholic. I don't see you providing anything supporting your claims at all at this point. And if youdon't believe in the trinity then this conversation is especially moot since you're already a blasphemer and destined for hell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsecx

the debate is blasphemy of the lord. the scripture is pretty clear that the wine in question was alcoholic. I don't see you providing anything supporting your claims at all at this point. And if youdon't believe in the trinity then this conversation is especially moot since you're already a blasphemer and destined for hell.

---

The scripture is clear that wine in question was just wine, nothing more. Where do keep coming up with that the wine was alcoholic? Please elaborate. Just because a bunch of pastors put it on the web, doesn't mean jack.

So everyone that doesn't believe in catholicism’s holy trinity is going to hell? That's just plain sad. Very sad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Old_Man_sxe

The scripture is clear that wine in question was just wine, nothing more. Where do keep coming up with that the wine was alcoholic? Please elaborate. Just because a bunch of pastors put it on the web, doesn't mean jack.

So everyone that doesn't believe in catholicism’s holy trinity is going to hell? That's just plain sad. Very sad.

---

it makes references to people being drunk. So where do you get that it or any wine that's mentioned in the bible isn't alcoholic? You haven't actually provided anything other than your unsupported opinion up til now, which doesn't mean jack.

the holy trinity isn't a catholic thing. You kind of have to believe in it to believe the rest of it. The concept of the father, son and holy ghost is the foundation of christianity, so yeah if you don't believe it it, and if they're right, you're going to hell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsecx

it makes references to people being drunk.

---

Check the King James Version and tell me that again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsecx

So where do you get that it or any wine that's mentioned in the bible isn't alcoholic? You haven't actually provided anything other than your unsupported opinion up til now, which doesn't mean jack.

---

Dido

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsecx

the holy trinity isn't a catholic thing. You kind of have to believe in it to believe the rest of it. The concept of the father, son and holy ghost is the foundation of christianity, so yeah if you don't believe it it, and if they're right, you're going to hell.

---

The trinity is the catholicism belief that Jesus Christ was actually God himself, not the son of God. I believe in God, Jesus Christ his son & The Holy Ghost, all as separate entities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Old_Man_sxe

Check the King James Version and tell me that again.

---

well drunk is in that version too. the implication that the wedding guests were drunk before the wine was supplied there too.

Quote:

---

Dido

---

yeah. still haven't actually provided anything.

Quote:

---

The trinity is the catholicism belief that Jesus Christ was actually God himself, not the son of God. I believe in God, Jesus Christ his son & The Holy Ghost, all as separate entities.

---

what you're trying to say you believe isn't a christian belief. the trinity isn't a catholicism thing. it's an all organzied christian thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsecx

well drunk is in that version too. the implication that the wedding guests were drunk before the wine was supplied there too.

---

This is based on YOUR interpretation. I not going to beat up on this dead horse anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsecx

yeah. still haven't actually provided anything.

---

When you actually prove something, then maybe I'll make the effort

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsecx

what you're trying to say you believe isn't a christian belief. the trinity isn't a catholicism thing. it's an all organzied christian thing.

---

Yes it is rooted deep in Catholicism. It's Origins are actually that of Babylonian Sects, but that’s an entire different subject matter.

Some Christians believe in separate entities, even some Catholics who disagree w/ church doctrine. I am one of them, before I turned my back on the church.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Old_Man_sxe

This is based on YOUR interpretation. I not going to beat up on this dead horse anymore.

---

bible scholars AND mine. you haven't brought up a single supporting piece of evidence other than "maybe the wine isn't wine". no history, no books, no nothing. just you and YOUR opinion.

Quote:

---

When you actually prove something, then maybe I'll make the effort

---

yeah, since you've clearly put so much effort up to this point.

Quote:

---

Yes it is rooted deep in Catholicism. It's Origins are actually that of Babylonian Sects, but that’s an entire different subject matter.

Some Christians believe in separate entities, even some Catholics who disagree w/ church doctrine. I am one of them, before I turned my back on the church.

---

considering that all christianity was deeply rooted in catholicism, I don't really get your point here, espeically since it was the first church. the best part of all of this is that it's moot, because regardless, jesus would still be divine, without sin and without the capablity of sin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsecx

it makes references to people being drunk. So where do you get that it or any wine that's mentioned in the bible isn't alcoholic? You haven't actually provided anything other than your unsupported opinion up til now, which doesn't mean jack.

the holy trinity isn't a catholic thing. You kind of have to believe in it to believe the rest of it. The concept of the father, son and holy ghost is the foundation of christianity, so yeah if you don't believe it it, and if they're right, you're going to hell.

---

The idea that different beliefs are blasphemy and that those with different beleifs are going to hell is completely untrue. I do not know about any religion specifically, but i know that the divisions of christianity that are around today are based upon different interpretations of religion. Martin Luther came up with the idea of protestantism because he disagreed with the catholic church, protestantism is different, however is still a sect of christianity. anglicanism was created in England because of disagreements with catholic beleifs, but still a form of christianity. I can go on. Different beleifs do not make anybody less christian.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsecx

bible scholars AND mine. you haven't brought up a single supporting piece of evidence other than "maybe the wine isn't wine". no history, no books, no nothing. just you and YOUR opinion.

---

Well, what do the scholars have to say?

and none of this bible school graduate stuff like the last reference url.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mouseman004

The idea that different beliefs are blasphemy and that those with different beleifs are going to hell is completely untrue. I do not know about any religion specifically, but i know that the divisions of christianity that are around today are based upon different interpretations of religion. Martin Luther came up with the idea of protestantism because he disagreed with the catholic church, protestantism is different, however is still a sect of christianity. anglicanism was created in England because of disagreements with catholic beleifs, but still a form of christianity. I can go on. Different beleifs do not make anybody less christian.

---

Don't get me wrong here, this isnt helping the idea of Jesus drinking wine, its just the issue that you can have different views on religion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mouseman004

The idea that different beliefs are blasphemy and that those with different beleifs are going to hell is completely untrue. I do not know about any religion specifically, but i know that the divisions of christianity that are around today are based upon different interpretations of religion. Martin Luther came up with the idea of protestantism because he disagreed with the catholic church, protestantism is different, however is still a sect of christianity. anglicanism was created in England because of disagreements with catholic beleifs, but still a form of christianity. I can go on. Different beleifs do not make anybody less christian.

---

it's these specific different beliefs that are the question and the issue. Saying that Jesus wasn't divine, is by definition blasphemy. The major differences within christianty when looking at them are all ritual and focus related, not the core belief. They all believe that Jesus was god in human form. They all believe that he was divine and flawless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Old_Man_sxe

and none of this bible school graduate stuff like the last reference url.

---

you mean from a bible scholar?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Old_Man_sxe

Well, what do the scholars have to say?

---

why can't you provide anything that's asked for? are you even capable?

Now I don't know about the sxe guidelines or anything. I didn't really think there was a rule book and for as long as I've been in the scene there has always been debate over certain issues. But I do know that in order to call yourself a Christian you must believe that Jesus is the Saviour. That is the only thing you need to acknowledge if you are a Christian. Nowhere does it say you must drink wine or support drinking wine. So therefore if I am straight edge and I believe that Jesus is my Saviour, it is possible to be sxe and Christian simultaneously.
Somewhere early in this thread someone mentioned a link regarding this debate. Can someone repost that? I'd be interested in reading it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xbatmanx

Now I don't know about the sxe guidelines or anything. I didn't really think there was a rule book and for as long as I've been in the scene there has always been debate over certain issues. But I do know that in order to call yourself a Christian you must believe that Jesus is the Saviour. That is the only thing you need to acknowledge if you are a Christian. Nowhere does it say you must drink wine or support drinking wine. So therefore if I am straight edge and I believe that Jesus is my Saviour, it is possible to be sxe and Christian simultaneously.
Somewhere early in this thread someone mentioned a link regarding this debate. Can someone repost that? I'd be interested in reading it.

---

the issue comes down to basic logic, not what is said in the bible. if jesus is your savior and is the lord, then he is flawless. jesus drank alcohol. even if you want to believe he didn't, he still clearly had no problem with alcohol consumption since he turned water to wine. Straight edge kids believe that drinking alcohol is wrong. This contradicts Jesus. You can't contradict jesus if you believe him to be perfect, sinless and flawless.

full debate here:
http://sxe.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2558

It is not necessarily true that Jesus is flawless. Jesus has human characteristics as well. Humans are by nature flawed. Jesus had both divinity (miracles) and human flaws (drinking). Jesus came down to teach us how to live. Not one of his sermons told us we need to drink. He taught us things like loving thy neighbor not drinking thy wine. His actions did not always reflect what he taught. He taught us to turn the other cheek, yet in the temple he flipped out and destroyed the little market they had going on. So drinking was not fundamental to his teachings. I reiterate, Jesus was not perfect. He was human. He was without sin. So all that proves is that drinking is not considered a sin in the eyes of God.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xbatmanx

It is not necessarily true that Jesus is flawless. Jesus has human characteristics as well. Humans are by nature flawed. Jesus had both divinity (miracles) and human flaws (drinking). Jesus came down to teach us how to live. Not one of his sermons told us we need to drink. He taught us things like loving thy neighbor not drinking thy wine. His actions did not always reflect what he taught. He taught us to turn the other cheek, yet in the temple he flipped out and destroyed the little market they had going on. So drinking was not fundamental to his teachings. I reiterate, Jesus was not perfect. He was human. He was without sin. So all that proves is that drinking is not considered a sin in the eyes of God.

---

Jesus was either without sin AND perfect, or he was neither. You can't be human and sinless. You also can't be human and have no physical father and come from a virgin birth or create miracles. There is a logical paradox in believing that jesus is wrong and you are right. Or even that jesus had the capacity to be wrong. That's the pisser about being christian, it really does have to be an all or nothing kind of thing. Jesus either was something or he wasn't. He can't be kinda godlike. He's either god or he isn't. The same paradox happens with people who think eating meat is wrong and are christian.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsecx

Jesus was either without sin AND perfect, or he was neither. You can't be human and sinless. You also can't be human and have no physical father and come from a virgin birth or create miracles. There is a logical paradox in believing that jesus is wrong and you are right. Or even that jesus had the capacity to be wrong. That's the pisser about being christian, it really does have to be an all or nothing kind of thing. Jesus either was something or he wasn't. He can't be kinda godlike. He's either god or he isn't. The same paradox happens with people who think eating meat is wrong and are christian.

---

No, this is what we refer to as the "duality of Jesus." He was given human nature in order to suffer. Suffer for our sins specifically. I'm also vegan and I don't see a paradox with being both Christian and vegan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xbatmanx

No, this is what we refer to as the "duality of Jesus." He was given human nature in order to suffer. Suffer for our sins specifically. I'm also vegan and I don't see a paradox with being both Christian and vegan.

---

He was given human nature, but was still without sin. Unless you're going to try and explain to me how jesus did sin and wasn't perfect. Or if he didn't sin, but then somehow wasn't perfect.

Ok. so you think that eating meat is wrong, but you don't see the paradox in saying that Jesus was wrong? That your opinion on an issue can be different from your god?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsecx

He was given human nature, but was still without sin. Unless you're going to try and explain to me how jesus did sin and wasn't perfect. Or if he didn't sin, but then somehow wasn't perfect.

Ok. so you think that eating meat is wrong, but you don't see the paradox in saying that Jesus was wrong? That your opinion on an issue can be different from your god?

---

A person without sin does not make one a perfect person. Jesus disobeyed Mary, he fell when he carried the cross, he was weak at times. This is the human side of it. Sin is a crime against God basically. If you don't believe in the duality of Jesus that's fine, it's what Christians believe. Christianity is a faith-based religion. I can't argue points of faith with you because we have different beliefs. It's kind of that you either have faith or you don't, ya know?
And as far as eating meat, how about the passage in Genesis where God gives us dominion over animals. As a king has dominion over his people (hence the word kingdom). That does not entitle the king to exploit or eat the people of his kingdom. A good king nurtures his kingdom. I will not claim that the Bible does not have it's contradictions though. But I do keep in mind that despite divine intervention, it was written by the hand of man. And even still it has been translated and edited over and over for close to 2000 years. Something is bound to get lost in translation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xbatmanx

A person without sin does not make one a perfect person. Jesus disobeyed Mary, he fell when he carried the cross, he was weak at times. This is the human side of it. Sin is a crime against God basically. If you don't believe in the duality of Jesus that's fine, it's what Christians believe. Christianity is a faith-based religion. I can't argue points of faith with you because we have different beliefs. It's kind of that you either have faith or you don't, ya know?
And as far as eating meat, how about the passage in Genesis where God gives us dominion over animals. As a king has dominion over his people (hence the word kingdom). That does not entitle the king to exploit or eat the people of his kingdom. A good king nurtures his kingdom. I will not claim that the Bible does not have it's contradictions though. But I do keep in mind that despite divine intervention, it was written by the hand of man. And even still it has been translated and edited over and over for close to 2000 years. Something is bound to get lost in translation.

---

without sin means without fault. All faults are a crime against god. Which is why jesus is held as an example. What you just listed as examples would in fact be sins. If Jesus disobeyed mary, then he commited a sin and broken a commandment. Now if jesus is divine, then he is perfect, because god is perfect. Now if you don't think god is perfect then there are issues.

Jesus fed people loaves and fishes. You are saying that eating fish is wrong and that jesus is wrong. Jesus is divine and can't be wrong. and surely you a simple human, who isn't divine can't be right when god is wrong? How can you not recognize that there is a major paradox there? How can your opinion and the opinion of your GOD on an issue differ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsecx

without sin means without fault. All faults are a crime against god. Which is why jesus is held as an example. What you just listed as examples would in fact be sins. If Jesus disobeyed mary, then he commited a sin and broken a commandment. Now if jesus is divine, then he is perfect, because god is perfect. Now if you don't think god is perfect then there are issues.

Jesus fed people loaves and fishes. You are saying that eating fish is wrong and that jesus is wrong. Jesus is divine and can't be wrong. and surely you a simple human, who isn't divine can't be right when god is wrong? How can you not recognize that there is a major paradox there? How can your opinion and the opinion of your GOD on an issue differ?

---

According to Webster's this is the def. of sin:
1 a : an offense against religious or moral law b : an action that is or is felt to be highly reprehensible <it's a sin to waste food> c : an often serious shortcoming : FAULT
2 a : transgression of the law of God b : a vitiated state of human nature in which the self is estranged from God
One can only assume that since the Bible speaks of the Law of God that we can exclude definition 1c from what we are considering sin in this case. Especially since we also need to consider the duality of Jesus. Without sin does not necessarily mean without fault. Imagine that you accidentally rear end a car. You are at fault. It's not a sin though. True that disobeying his mother was against the Ten Commandments, but he disobeyed her to obey God his father. What happens when one parent says one thing and another parent says another? I'd probably go with obeying God in that case.

Ok now as for veganism. First I'd like to reiterate that there are contradictions throughout the Bible on all different issues. This may be due to constant editing and translating. For instance, my thought on the line "I will hold true the law of man in Heaven." or whatever the exact quote is is that may have been added in there by some King or other political figurehead at some point in history because if the law of man goes against the law of God which it seems to do sometimes, then what does one do?
That being said, there are other factors that I believe do not conflict with veganism. Aside from what I said about Genesis in a previous post there is also a verse in Revelations where the Angel is condemning those who eat meat.
As for fish, it is believed that the fish in the Bible stories is symbolic. The Greek word for fish (Ichthys) was used as an acronym which in Greek stood for "Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour." The term "meat" in greek translates to nutrients in General. This is noted in Genesis as well where God says "Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed: to you it shall be for meat."